Home About Archives RSS Feed

@theMarket: Traders Profit-Taking After Great Run

By Bill SchmickiBerkshires columnist
What goes up, must come down — at least in the stock market. That doesn't mean that the bull market is over. More upside ahead in equities is a strong possibility, but first, we need to bottom.
 
"Stocks are stretched at this point; the rubber band could stretch further, but not right now. I believe next week we might see some downside in the averages (maybe 100 points give or take on the S&P 500), but then up again too as high as 4,600."
 
That was my take on where stocks were going in last week's column. Thus far, we seem to be right on target. Artificial intelligence stocks are leading this bout of profit-taking. Many smaller AI stocks have given back almost half their recent gains. That is as it should be given the extraordinary gains investors have enjoyed in some of these names. The technology area in general led the market's decline, but few areas were safe from this round of profit-taking.
 
A bout of central bank hikes in interest rates around the world contributed to the malaise in stocks, at least according to the news media. The Bank of England increased rates by 50 basis points, and Norway, Switzerland, Turkey, and New Zealand joined in as well. Sweden is expected to do the same next week, and both Canada and Australia did so last week. Over the last six months, almost four dozen countries have done the same.
 
In addition, while the U.S. Federal Reserve Bank announced a pause last week in its rate hikes, this week Fed officials made it clear that their rate tightening regime is not over. Fed Chair Jerome Powell testified for two days before Congress this week. In his testimony before congressional lawmakers, he went to great pains to notify the financial markets that he fully expected at least two more rate hikes in the months ahead.
 
He maintained that inflation was still running too hot and that, yes, there was "certainly a possibility" of a recession. Achieving a "soft landing" in which policy tightens without severe economic circumstances such as a recession, will be difficult, he cautioned.
 
While his remarks were no different than his statements last week after the FOMC meeting, the markets reacted quite differently. Last week it was up, up, and away on Thursday and Friday. This week, it was the opposite. My own belief is that bullish momentum traders had hit their targets in the indexes by Friday (as did I), and central bankers merely gave them an excuse to lock in some great profits.
 
Since the NASDAQ 100 has led the markets higher and is leading them lower now, I would watch that index for clues on what will happen next. The QQQ, an exchange-traded fund, represents that index and is trading around 362. I see a downside risk to 352 on the QQQs, or another 2-3 percent pullback from here. At that point, we will determine if the profit-taking is over or not.
 
As for the S&P 500 Index, I am watching the 4,320-4,350 area. On Friday, the bulls were attempting to defend that 4,350 level. We are down 66 points from last Friday with possibly another 34 points to go for my expected 100-point decline. After that, we should see some upside.
 

Bill Schmick is the founding partner of Onota Partners, Inc., in the Berkshires. His forecasts and opinions are purely his own and do not necessarily represent the views of Onota Partners Inc. (OPI). None of his commentary is or should be considered investment advice. Direct your inquiries to Bill at 1-413-347-2401 or email him at bill@schmicksretiredinvestor.com.

Anyone seeking individualized investment advice should contact a qualified investment adviser. None of the information presented in this article is intended to be and should not be construed as an endorsement of OPI, Inc. or a solicitation to become a client of OPI. The reader should not assume that any strategies or specific investments discussed are employed, bought, sold, or held by OPI. Investments in securities are not insured, protected, or guaranteed and may result in loss of income and/or principal. This communication may include opinions and forward-looking statements, and we can give no assurance that such beliefs and expectations will prove to be correct. Investments in securities are not insured, protected, or guaranteed and may result in loss of income and/or principal. This communication may include opinions and forward-looking statements, and we can give no assurance that such beliefs and expectations will prove to be correct.

 

     

The Retired Investor: Teens Face Robust Summer Job Market

By Bill SchmickiBerkshires columnist
Summer jobs for teenagers are expected to rise this summer. Even better news, while the job openings are higher, so too are the wages young workers can command.
 
Teens have a long history of labor market participation in America. Between World War II and the end of the 20th century, at least half of the nation's teenagers were active participants in the labor force. 
 
Back in my day, getting a summer job in high school was a status symbol, a source of spending money, and a chance to show the world what I could accomplish given the chance. Back then, summer jobs provided real-world experience and helped street kids like me develop work-related skills, especially soft skills that apply to almost all career paths.
 
I credit summer and after-school jobs for keeping me on the right side of the law in a neighborhood where crime, gang fights, and booze on the corner were a nightly occurrence. Academic research indicates that summer employment still has positive effects on all of the above areas, plus teenagers' overall academic and career aspirations, work habits, and job readiness. 
 
Over the past three years, as readers know, the U.S. has been wrestling with a nationwide labor shortage. Blame the Pandemic, the retirement of Baby Boomers, the strong economy, or whatever. One silver lining in this woeful tale is that the demand for teen labor has increased dramatically.
 
The workforce of 16- to 19-year-olds was hit hard by the Pandemic. That made sense since teens usually work at the entry-level in the retail trade, leisure, and hospitality sectors. Those were the areas that were most impacted by Covid-19 and the subsequent lockdowns, etc.
 
As the labor market began to bounce back in 2020, teen employment improved as many older workers continued to remain out of the workforce. Demand for service jobs skyrocketed. By the end of the first quarter of 2023, the teen employment rate in the U.S. stood at 33.4 percent. That was the highest rate since 2009, according to "The 2023 Summer Job Outlook for American Teens," a research study by Rhode Island College.
 
Since 2019, the tight labor market, especially at the entry-level, caused hourly wages to rise sharply. Weekly pay for summer teen workers increased from $280 in 2019 to $300 by the summer of 2022. That 7 percent increase beat the 20-to-24 age group's 4 percent gain and the prime age group (ages 25-54) wage gain of 2 percent. Older workers (over 55) saw wages decline by 1 percent.
 
The national lifeguard shortage is a good example of this trend. For the third summer in a row, a lack of lifeguards is expected to keep about a third of the nation's 309,000 public pools closed or operating with reduced hours. This does not include beaches, water parks, and other venues, which are in a similar position. Teenage workers are nowhere to be found. To woo more young workers, cities, and states are raising wages and/or offering incentives including one-time bonuses.
 
The bad news for teens overall is that since the turn of the century, the participation of teens in the workforce has been on a steady decline. At the peak of the 1990s' labor market boom, 52 percent of teens were working. Teens held one out of every 20 jobs across the nation. By the Great Recession of 2008-2009, the teen participation rate in the labor force fell to 41 percent and remained in a range of between 34-35 percent from 2011 through 2019. At that point, one out of every 30 jobs were held by teens.
 
No other group experienced such a sharp decline in employment during those years. What is worse, the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics has forecasted that by 2031, the teen participation rate will fall to under 30 percent.
 
The reasons for this troubling demographic are varied. Substantial job deficits were a source of unemployment for most Americans during the period in question. At the bottom of the Great Recession, there were six unemployed workers for every job opening. Unemployed college grads found themselves working in the food services and retail trade. In addition, older workers and unskilled or undereducated foreign workers took many of the menial jobs usually reserved for youth. In sum, teens were crowded out of a scarce employment market.
 
The question remains. Will this renaissance in labor participation for today's teens continue, or is it simply a flash in the pan? I hope that the Labor Department is wrong, and America's youth will find their summer jobs as fulfilling as mine was.
 

Bill Schmick is the founding partner of Onota Partners, Inc., in the Berkshires. His forecasts and opinions are purely his own and do not necessarily represent the views of Onota Partners Inc. (OPI). None of his commentary is or should be considered investment advice. Direct your inquiries to Bill at 1-413-347-2401 or email him at bill@schmicksretiredinvestor.com.

Anyone seeking individualized investment advice should contact a qualified investment adviser. None of the information presented in this article is intended to be and should not be construed as an endorsement of OPI, Inc. or a solicitation to become a client of OPI. The reader should not assume that any strategies or specific investments discussed are employed, bought, sold, or held by OPI. Investments in securities are not insured, protected, or guaranteed and may result in loss of income and/or principal. This communication may include opinions and forward-looking statements, and we can give no assurance that such beliefs and expectations will prove to be correct. Investments in securities are not insured, protected, or guaranteed and may result in loss of income and/or principal. This communication may include opinions and forward-looking statements, and we can give no assurance that such beliefs and expectations will prove to be correct.

 

     

The Retired Investor: Will the Insurance Sector Become Another Victim of Climate Change?

By Bill SchmickiBerkshires columnist
As the smoke from Canadian wildfires clears (literally) here in the Northeast, the awareness of climate change has risen. For the insurance industry, that knowledge has already precipitated some worrying policy changes.
 
Last month, the news that two major insurers were no longer going to sell homeowner's policies in California may have come as a surprise to some. But like me, I am sure that most readers simply dismissed the issue as a problem between a West Coast state's regulations and the insurance industry.
 
In California, which some think as the home of liberal politicians and crazy ideas, regulators have capped rates insurance companies can charge the public. On average, residents pay $1,300 per year in insurance rates, which has been artificially low for years when compared to other states. After years of losses, State Farm and Allstate Insurance companies called it quits.
 
Last month, State Farm stated that "due to historic increases in construction costs outpacing inflation, rapidly growing catastrophe exposure, and a challenging reinsurance market," they were done accepting new applications for property insurance from both homeowners and commercial property owners.
 
What to do? The easy answer would be for California to just remove the rate cap for insurance, the companies would relent, and the problem is solved. Sure, that works, if you are OK to see your insurance policy double, triple, or maybe quadruple in the years to come as wildfires continue to rage. And it is not just about wildfires.
 
Take Florida's issues for example. Hurricanes and flooding have devastated the state. As of right now, homes are still insurable in many areas, but at what cost?
 
In Florida average annual rates are forecasted to rise 43 percent to almost $6,000 this year. Experts believe that the annual cost to insure your home in Florida could top $10,000 a year in a few years. In some areas, it is already that high. Despite those rates, two dozen Florida insurers are on the state government's financial watchlist as rates are still not keeping up with underwriting losses.
 
In many areas of Florida, the only recourse for homeowners' insurance is the state-backed Citizens Property Insurance, which has become the largest insurer in the state with greater than 1.2 million customers. And like California, rate increases are restricted by regulators. Aside from the intensity and frequency of damage from climate change, home replacement costs have also gained by more than 50 percent since 2019 as wages and material costs have climbed.
 
As in other areas, reinsurance costs (insurer's insurance) have also skyrocketed, especially in areas that have been impacted the most by climate change. Today, insurance costs are the highest and/or most difficult to procure in California, Florida, Texas, Colorado, Louisiana and New York in that order.
 
Over half of the worst disasters (in dollar terms) in U.S. history have happened since 2010, according to the National Multifamily Housing Council. Unfortunately, as time goes by, climate change in the form of drought, tornados, hurricanes, wildfires, snowstorms and floods will increase and impact all 50 states. And those are only the most common catastrophes we face today. The spread of life-threatening insects and disease, dust storms, rising water levels, and permanent damage to shrinking coastlines and waterways is yet to come.
 
Insurance costs, where available, are going to continue to rise, in my opinion. Many homeowners in more and more locales might find that they cannot obtain insurance. As climate risks rise, certain regions of the country could become uninsurable, at least by the private sector. Without insurance, the chances of obtaining a mortgage would be difficult at best. In the end, it would make living in certain areas cost-prohibitive for all but the very wealthy. That would spark migration away from coastlines and further inland. Many climatologists believe that is the best and only solution.
 
The alternative would be to establish some form of government insurance based on the California or Florida model.  Homeowner insurance rates would need to be capped, but the taxpayer would ultimately be on the hook to cover losses. I am not sure how happy voters would be with that solution. All that would manage to do is continue to escalate the cost of climate change, chase insurers out of the business, and allow (encourage) those who live in danger zones to continue to do so. 
 

Bill Schmick is the founding partner of Onota Partners, Inc., in the Berkshires. His forecasts and opinions are purely his own and do not necessarily represent the views of Onota Partners Inc. (OPI). None of his commentary is or should be considered investment advice. Direct your inquiries to Bill at 1-413-347-2401 or email him at bill@schmicksretiredinvestor.com.

Anyone seeking individualized investment advice should contact a qualified investment adviser. None of the information presented in this article is intended to be and should not be construed as an endorsement of OPI, Inc. or a solicitation to become a client of OPI. The reader should not assume that any strategies or specific investments discussed are employed, bought, sold, or held by OPI. Investments in securities are not insured, protected, or guaranteed and may result in loss of income and/or principal. This communication may include opinions and forward-looking statements, and we can give no assurance that such beliefs and expectations will prove to be correct. Investments in securities are not insured, protected, or guaranteed and may result in loss of income and/or principal. This communication may include opinions and forward-looking statements, and we can give no assurance that such beliefs and expectations will prove to be correct.

 

     

@theMarket: Bulls Need More Fuel to Move Higher

By Bill SchmickiBerkshires columnist
The bull market has been a story of eight to 10 stocks for most of the year. The frenzied trade in AI stocks has fueled those gains in that elite group of mega-stocks. But investors need to expand their focus to other areas for the stock market to continue to climb.
 
Artificial Intelligence (AI) has become this year's buzz words. Even though it has been around for well over a decade, investors have suddenly recognized the potential of this technological advancement. The benefits to productivity and economic growth in the years ahead may be as important, if not more important, as the internet revolution.
 
As in the dot.com boom, any company that can wag the flag of AI in front of the bull's face has seen its stock price soar. Investors should be warned, however, that there are a lot of companies that are claiming to be in the forefront of AI when they are not. As such, many investors are sticking with the leaders, which they know are leaders in AI. Companies like Google, Meta, Amazon, Microsoft, Tesla, and Nvidia have seen their stocks explode higher as a result.
 
All this excitement has narrowed the number of stocks that are pushing the markets higher, leaving other sectors in the dust. This works until it doesn't. The dot.com boom and bust comes to mind when looking at the present situation.
 
Back in the early 2000s, that mania saw investors bid up dot.com stocks to crazy levels only to see the whole thing collapse, cutting the NASDAQ in half or more over two years. That index only recovered its dot.com peak this year. One way for investors to avoid this danger would be to see an expansion of the number of stocks that are participating in this rally.
 
In the past week or so, I am starting to see this begin to happen. Small-cap stocks, as represented by the Russel 2000 Index, have been languishing for months and months until recently. This week it has outperformed the S&P 500 Index and even NASDAQ. I have also noticed that financials, industrials, basic materials, mining and metals, and precious metals were also seeing some interest. That is encouraging.
 
Many investors, wary of adding even more money to the "Mega-Cap 8," seem to be searching for alternative equity investments, especially if the Fed engineers a soft landing in the economy. All the above sectors would benefit under that scenario, as would the energy patch. A continuation of this rally is dependent upon good news next week.
 
We have three important events coming up--the Consumer Price Index (CPI), the Producer Price Index (PPI), and the Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC). The consensus view is that the CPI and the PPI will both come in lower for May. The FOMC meeting is expected to result in a pause in interest rate hikes. Skipping one month of increases will also be read as a positive by the markets.
 
Higher inflation numbers might cause the Fed to change its mind and raise interest rates again, which, as you might guess, would be taken negatively by the market and precipitate a sell-off. I don't think that will occur. However, we have already reached my low-end target on the S&P 500 Index at 4,325 (intraday). I said we could hit 4,410 or so if the stars are aligned and the data cooperate. Nonetheless, I suspect we will see some pullback in the markets in the weeks ahead once we climb a little higher.
 

Bill Schmick is the founding partner of Onota Partners, Inc., in the Berkshires. His forecasts and opinions are purely his own and do not necessarily represent the views of Onota Partners Inc. (OPI). None of his commentary is or should be considered investment advice. Direct your inquiries to Bill at 1-413-347-2401 or email him at bill@schmicksretiredinvestor.com.

Anyone seeking individualized investment advice should contact a qualified investment adviser. None of the information presented in this article is intended to be and should not be construed as an endorsement of OPI, Inc. or a solicitation to become a client of OPI. The reader should not assume that any strategies or specific investments discussed are employed, bought, sold, or held by OPI. Investments in securities are not insured, protected, or guaranteed and may result in loss of income and/or principal. This communication may include opinions and forward-looking statements, and we can give no assurance that such beliefs and expectations will prove to be correct. Investments in securities are not insured, protected, or guaranteed and may result in loss of income and/or principal. This communication may include opinions and forward-looking statements, and we can give no assurance that such beliefs and expectations will prove to be correct.

 

     

The Retired Investor: Government Bond Borrowing Could Cause Disruption

By Bill SchmickiBerkshires columnist
The debt ceiling crisis has come and gone but the financial markets did not get away scot-free. The bond market is facing an avalanche of new bond sales that could pressure interest rates higher.
 
The government's bank account, called the Treasury General Account, is practically empty in sovereign terms. Today, there is less than $50 billion in the account as of June 2, 2023.
 
The U.S. Treasury has been draining this account since January 2023, when the government debt ceiling controversy started to heat up. The government cut back on the number and amount of bond auctions, which were almost a weekly feature of sovereign debt financing in normal times.
 
The dearth of new supplies of government bonds added liquidity to the financial system. As the fear of a government default grew, yields on government bonds rose and liquidity continued to increase. Where did all that money end up — in the stock market?
 
It explains to some extent why investors flocked to the FANG stocks. Investors sought the largest, safest, most liquid equities they could find as bond equivalents. Stocks continued to climb as liquidity increased.
 
Could we be facing a reverse of this situation as the supply of Treasury bills increases in the months ahead? The answer depends on how much money the government will need to raise in the short term.
 
Experts expect the government will need to raise as much as $1 trillion-$1.4 trillion in Treasury bills over the next six months just to return the government's balances to normal. That would include continued funding of the U.S.'s day-to-day needs.
 
If that estimate proves to be accurate, it would be the largest issuance of Treasury bills in history (excluding the major financial crisis of 2008 and the pandemic in 2020). To put this in perspective, the money needed to be raised would be about five times the supply of bills in an average three-month stretch in the years before the pandemic.
 
On the negative side of the ledger, dumping that amount of bills onto the market, while the economy appears to be slowing, is risky enough. If one also includes the problems in the regional banking sector, then we may be flirting with financial danger. Siphoning a lot more money out of the banking system, which has already seen enormous outflows because of the regional banking crisis, would force these banks to raise more cash.  Their financing costs would rise and stress an already fragile system.
 
However, some positives could mitigate some of the risks. Currently, more than $2 trillion is sitting in money market assets yielding over 5 percent at the Federal Reserve Bank's overnight repo facility. This money is what I call "yield-hungry assets" that can move to wherever the return in yields is greatest. That money could easily support the government's treasury bill auctions, but the price of that would be higher interest rate yields.
 
What that may mean for you and me, is an opportunity to earn even more on your money market funds this summer. It could also mean an overall rise in yields on two-, three-, and four-year bonds, which could also offer bond investors opportunities. It could also cause some disruption in the stock market during the same period. Time will tell.
 

Bill Schmick is the founding partner of Onota Partners, Inc., in the Berkshires. His forecasts and opinions are purely his own and do not necessarily represent the views of Onota Partners Inc. (OPI). None of his commentary is or should be considered investment advice. Direct your inquiries to Bill at 1-413-347-2401 or email him at bill@schmicksretiredinvestor.com.

Anyone seeking individualized investment advice should contact a qualified investment adviser. None of the information presented in this article is intended to be and should not be construed as an endorsement of OPI, Inc. or a solicitation to become a client of OPI. The reader should not assume that any strategies or specific investments discussed are employed, bought, sold, or held by OPI. Investments in securities are not insured, protected, or guaranteed and may result in loss of income and/or principal. This communication may include opinions and forward-looking statements, and we can give no assurance that such beliefs and expectations will prove to be correct. Investments in securities are not insured, protected, or guaranteed and may result in loss of income and/or principal. This communication may include opinions and forward-looking statements, and we can give no assurance that such beliefs and expectations will prove to be correct.

 

     
Page 14 of 223... 9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  19 ... 223  

Support Local News

We show up at hurricanes, budget meetings, high school games, accidents, fires and community events. We show up at celebrations and tragedies and everything in between. We show up so our readers can learn about pivotal events that affect their communities and their lives.

How important is local news to you? You can support independent, unbiased journalism and help iBerkshires grow for as a little as the cost of a cup of coffee a week.

News Headlines
Scoil Rince Bréifne Ó Ruairc Participated in North American Open Championships
Pittsfield Police Participating in US 20 Speed Enforcement Project
MassDOT Project Will Affect Traffic Near BMC
Dalton ADA Committee Explores Expanding
Milne Public Library Trustees Announce New Library Director
Clark Art Presents Free Thematic Tour on Music in Art
BCC, Mill Town Partner to Support Philanthropy Through 40 Under Forty
SVMC' Wellness Connection: March 15
Pittsfield Community Meeting On Rest of the River Project
Slavic Easter Egg Decorating At Ventfort Hall
 
 


Categories:
@theMarket (480)
Independent Investor (451)
Retired Investor (183)
Archives:
March 2024 (5)
March 2023 (4)
February 2024 (8)
January 2024 (8)
December 2023 (9)
November 2023 (5)
October 2023 (7)
September 2023 (8)
August 2023 (7)
July 2023 (7)
June 2023 (8)
May 2023 (8)
April 2023 (8)
Tags:
Europe Commodities Debt Energy Greece Banking Banks Markets Crisis Jobs Fiscal Cliff Currency Congress Metals Rally Election Stock Market Europe Stocks Euro Economy Oil Federal Reserve Japan Taxes Debt Ceiling Deficit Interest Rates Retirement Stimulus Employment Pullback Recession Bailout Selloff
Popular Entries:
The Independent Investor: Don't Fight the Fed
Independent Investor: Europe's Banking Crisis
@theMarket: Let the Good Times Roll
The Independent Investor: Japan — The Sun Is Beginning to Rise
Independent Investor: Enough Already!
@theMarket: Let Silver Be A Lesson
Independent Investor: What To Expect After a Waterfall Decline
@theMarket: One Down, One to Go
@theMarket: 707 Days
The Independent Investor: And Now For That Deficit
Recent Entries:
@theMarket: Sticky Inflation Slows Market Advance
The Retired Investor: Eating Out Not What It Used to Be
@theMarket: Markets March to New Highs (Again)
The Retired Investor: Companies Dropping Degree Requirements
@theMarket: Tech Takes Break as Other Sectors Play Catch-up
The Retired Investor: The Economics of Taylor Swift
@theMarket: Nvidia Leads Markets to Record Highs
The Retired Investor: The Chocolate Crisis, or Where Is Willie Wonka When You Need Him
The Retired Investor: Auto Insurance Premiums Keep Rising
@theMarket: Melt-up in Markets Fueled by Momentum