by Scott Martindale
  CEO, Sabrient Systems LLC
 

  Overview

So much for the adage, “Sell in May and go away.” May was the best month for the stock market since November 2023 and the best month of May for the stock market in 35 years, with the S&P 500 up +6.1% and Nasdaq 100 up +9.3%. Moreover, the S&P 500 has risen more than 1,000 points (20%) from its 4/8 low and is back into positive territory YTD (and challenging the 6,000 level). History says when stocks rally so strongly off a low, the 12-month returns tend to be quite good. Even better news is that the rally has been broad-based, with the equal-weight versions of the indexes performing in line with the cap-weights, and with the advance/decline lines hitting all-time highs. An as Warren Pies of 3Fourteen Research observed on X.com, “…the S&P 500 has retraced 84% of its peak-to-trough decline. The [market] has never retraced this much of a bear market and subsequently revisited the lows. The technical evidence points, overwhelmingly, to the beginning of another leg to the bull market and new ATHs.” We certainly aren’t seeing the H1 volatility I expected, with the CBOE Volatility Index (VIX) back down to February levels. So, is this the all-clear signal for stocks? Well, let’s explore this a bit.

As Josh Brown of Ritholtz Wealth Management reminds us, “Stocks [tend to] bottom in price a full 9 months before earnings do… By the time earnings are reaching their cycle low, stocks have already been rallying for three quarters of a year in advance of that low. This is why you don’t wait to get invested or attempt to sit out the economic or earnings downturns.” Typically, the growth rates for GDP, corporate earnings, wages, and stock prices should not stray too far apart since they are all closely linked to a strong economy. And as of 6/9, the Atlanta Fed’s GDPNow model indicates an eye-popping +3.8% growth is in store for Q2 (albeit largely due to a collapse in imports following the negative Q1 print from front-running of imports, ahead of the tariffs).

And with the last administration’s last-minute surge in deficit spending wearing off, the new administration is doing quite well in bringing down inflation, starting with oil prices. Indeed, April CPI came in at +2.33% YoY and the rolling 3-month annualized CPI (a better measure of the current trend) is +1.56%. Looking ahead, the Cleveland Fed’s Inflation NowCasting model forecasts May CPI of +2.40% YoY and an annualized Q2 CPI of +1.70%, while the real-time, blockchain-based Truflation metric is +1.90% (as of 6/9). After all, disruptive innovation like AI is deflationary by increasing productivity, China’s economic woes are deflationary (cheaper goods), and tariffs are deflationary (in the absence of commensurate rise in income), so the rising GDP forecast and falling CPI numbers reflect the exact oppositive of the “stagflation” scare the MSM keeps trumpeting. I discuss inflation in greater length in today’s post below.

It all sounds quite encouraging, right? Well, not so fast. For starters, the charts look severely overbought with ominous negative divergences that could retrace a lot of gains. Moreover, with ISM manufacturing and services indexes both in contraction, with so much lingering uncertainty around trade negotiations, with President Trump’s “one big, beautiful bill” (aka OBBB) wending a treacherous path through congress, and with his ambitious drive to reverse the course and negative outcomes of decades of hyper-globalization, entitlement creep, and climate/cultural activism facing fierce resistance both at home and abroad, the coast is hardly clear.

Witness the rise in bond term premiums even as the Fed contemplates cutting its benchmark rate as foreign central banks and bond vigilantes slash demand for Treasuries (or even sell them short) due to expectations of unbridled federal debt and Treasury issuance. According to Mike Wilson of Morgan Stanley: “we identified 4%-4.5% [10-year yield] as the sweet spot for equity multiples, provided that growth and earnings stay on track.” Similarly, Goldman Sachs sees 4.5% acting as a ceiling for stock valuations—and that is precisely where the rate closed on Friday 6/6. Wilson identified four factors that he believes would sustain market strength: 1) a trade deal with China, 2) stabilizing earnings revisions, 3) a more dovish Fed (i.e., rate cuts), and 4) the 10-year yield below 4% (without being driven by recessionary data)—but there has been observable progress only in the first two.

Regarding our debt & deficit death spiral, I will argue in my full commentary below that despite all the uproar, the OBBB might not need to institute harsh austerity with further cuts to entitlements (which, along with interest on the debt, amount to 73% of spending) that would mostly hurt the middle/working classes. The bill rightly repeals low-ROI tax credits and spending for boondoggles from prior bills, most notably low-transformity/low-reliability wind and solar energy projects that require government subsidies to be economically viable. But beyond that, the focus should be on lowering the debt/GDP ratio through fiscal and monetary policies that foster robust organic economic growth (the denominator) led by an unleashed private sector fueled by tax rate cuts and incentives for capital investment, deregulation, disruptive innovation, and high-transformity/high-reliability natural gas and next-generation nuclear technology. Real Investment Advice agrees, arguing that market pundits might be “too focused on the deficit amount…rather than our ability to pay for it, i.e., economic growth.”  The charts below show the debt-to-GDP ratio, which is about 120% today, alongside the federal deficit-to-GDP ratio, which is about 6.6% today. (Note that US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent’s target of 3% deficit-to-GDP was last seen in 2016.)

Of course, nothing is all bad or all good. But Trump is shining a bright light on the devastating fallout on our national security, strategic supply chains, and middle/working classes. Changing the pace and direction of globalization, including deglobalizing some supply chains, reshoring strategic manufacturing, and focusing on low-cost energy solutions for a power-hungry world cannot occur without significant disruption. Within the US, we can have different states provide different types of industries and services depending upon their comparative advantages like natural resources, labor costs, demographics, geography, etc.—after all, we are all part of one country. But on a global scale, with some key trading partners that might be better considered rivals, or even enemies in some cases, we can’t entrust our national security to the goodwill and mutual benefit of international trade. Indeed, China has a history of not fulfilling its commitments in prior trade agreements, like reducing state subsidies overproduction (“dumping”), and IP theft, moving some manufacturing into the US, and increasing imports of US goods.

I have talked often about the 3-pronged approach of addressing our federal debt by: 1) inflating it away with slightly elevated inflation around 2.4% to erode the value of dollars owed and increase nominal GDP to reduce the debt-to-GDP ratio, 2) cutting it away with modest reductions or at least freezes on spending and entitlements, and 3) growing it away by fostering robust organic growth from a vibrant private sector with pro-cyclical fiscal and monetary policies that ultimately grows tax receipts on higher income and GDP (even at lower tax rates) and reduces the debt-to-GDP ratio. But of these three, the big “clean-up hitter” must be #3—robust growth. In fact, a key reason that the OBBB does not propose more austerity measures (i.e., spending cuts beyond waste, fraud, and the “peace dividend”) is to ensure that GDP grows faster than the debt and deficit. We can only live with slightly elevated inflation, and it is difficult to cut much spending given the dominance of mandatory spending (entitlements and interest payments) over discretionary spending. So, the primary driver must be robust private sector organic growth—and by extension an embrace of disruptive innovation and a productivity growth boom that boosts real GDP growth, keeps a lid on inflation, widens profit margins—leading to rising wages tax remittances.

As a case in point, I highly recommend a recent episode of the All-In Podcast in which the panel of four Tech billionaires (of various political persuasions) speak with Miami Mayor Francis Suarez. In 2017, Suarez took over leadership of a city that was in distress, near bankruptcy, and a murder capital of the country, and he resurrected it with three core principles for success: “keep taxes low, keep people safe, lean into innovation”—whereas he laments that most other big-city mayors prefer to do the opposite, i.e., raise taxes, tolerate crime, create suffocating regulations, and reject the offers and entreaties of billionaire entrepreneurs like Jeff Bezos (Amazon) and Elon Musk (Tesla) as overly disruptive or politically incorrect.

May inflation metrics will come out this week, and then the June FOMC meeting convenes 6/17-18. So far, the FOMC has been quite happy to just sit on its hands (while the ECB just cut for an 8th time) in the face of tariff paralysis; falling oil prices, unit labor costs, and New Tenant Rents; declining inflation and savings rates; rising delinquencies; and slowing jobs growth; instead preferring to be reactive to sudden distress rather than proactive in preventing such distress. Inflation metrics continue to pull back after being propped up by elevated energy prices, long-lag shelter costs, and the prior administration’s profligate federal deficit spending that overshadowed—and indeed created—sluggish growth in the private sector. Economist Michael Howell of CrossBorder Capital persuasively asserts that monetary policy “must prioritize liquidity over inflation concerns, so the Fed’s current hands-off, higher-for-longer, reactionary approach risks causing a liquidity crunch.”

So, I believe it’s going to be hard for Fed Chair Jay Powell to justify continuing to “wait & watch.” As of 6/9, CME Group fed funds futures show zero odds of a 25-bp rate cut this month, but increases to 17% at the July meeting, and 64% odds of at least 50 bps by year-end. I have been insisting for some time that the FFR needs to be 100 bps lower, as the US economy's headline GDP and jobs numbers were long artificially propped up by excessive, inefficient, and often unproductive federal deficit spending, while the hamstrung private sector has seen sluggish growth, and 30-year mortgage rates need to be closer to 5% to allow the housing market to function properly. But regardless of the FOMC decision this month, I expect the rate-cutting cycle to restart soon and signed trade deals to emerge with our 18 key trading partners, calming domestic and foreign investors.

I still expect new highs in stocks by year end. For now, traders might wait for a pullback and bounce from support levels, or perhaps an upside breakout beyond the 6,000 level on the S&P 500. But my suggestion to investors remains this: Don’t chase the highflyers and instead focus on high-quality businesses at reasonable prices, expect elevated volatility given the uncertainty of the new administration’s policies and impact, and be prepared to exploit any market pullbacks by accumulating those high-quality stocks in anticipation of gains by year end and beyond, fueled by the massive and relentless capital investment in blockchain and AI applications, infrastructure, and energy, leading to rising productivity, increased productive capacity (or “duplicative excess capacity,” in the words of Secretary Bessent, which would be disinflationary), and economic expansion, as I explore in greater depth in my full post below.

Rather than investing in the passive cap-weighted indexes dominated by Big Tech, investors may be better served by active stock selection that seeks to identify under-the-radar, undervalued, high-quality gems. This is what Sabrient seeks to do in our various portfolios, all of which provide exposure to Value, Quality, Growth, and Size factors and to both secular and cyclical growth trends. When I say, “high-quality company,” I mean one that is fundamentally strong, displaying a history of consistent, reliable, and accelerating sales and earnings growth, a history of meeting/beating estimates, high capital efficiency, rising profit margins and free cash flow, solid earnings quality, low debt burden, and a reasonable valuation compared to its peers and its own history. These are the factors Sabrient employs in selecting our Baker’s Dozen, Forward Looking Value, Dividend, and Small Cap Growth portfolios (which are packaged and distributed as UITs by First Trust Portfolios). We also use many of those factors in our SectorCast ETF ranking model, and notably, our proprietary Earnings Quality Rank (EQR) is a key factor used in each of our portfolios, and it is also licensed to the actively managed First Trust Long-Short ETF (FTLS) as a quality prescreen.

Sabrient founder David Brown describes these and other factors as well as his portfolio construction process in his latest book. He also describes his path from NASA scientist in the Apollo moon landing program to creating quant models for ranking stocks and building stock portfolios. And as a companion product to the book, we have launched our next-generation Sabrient Scorecards for Stocks and ETFs, which are powerful digital tools that rank stocks and ETFs using our proprietary factors. You can learn more about both the book and scorecards by visiting: http://HighPerformanceStockPortfolios.com.

Keep in mind, stock market tops rarely happen when investors are cautious, as they continue to be today. So, I continue to believe in staying invested in stocks but also in gold, gold royalty companies, Bitcoin (as an alternative store of value), and perhaps Ethereum (for its expanding use case). These not only serve as hedges against dollar debasement but as core holdings within a strategically diversified portfolio. Bitcoin’s climb back to new highs in May has been much more methodical and disciplined than its previous history of maniacal FOMO momentum surges that were always destined to retrace. This is what comes from maturity and broader institutional acceptance, characterized by “stickier” holders and strategic allocations. Notably, iShares Bitcoin Trust ETF (IBIT) had its largest-ever monthly inflow during May.

I highly encourage you to read my full commentary below. I discuss in greater depth the economic metrics, the truth about the OBBB, deglobalization, trade wars, affordable energy, economic growth, jobs, inflation, and global liquidity. I also discuss Sabrient’s latest fundamental-based SectorCast quantitative rankings of the ten U.S. business sectors, current positioning of our sector rotation model, and several top-ranked ETF ideas. Click HERE for a link to this post in printable PDF format.

By the way, rather than including my in-depth discussion of energy and electrical power generation in this post, I will be releasing it in a special report a little later this month, so please watch for it. As always, please let me know your thoughts on this article, and feel free to contact me about speaking on any of these topics at your event!  Read on….

  by Scott Martindale
  President & CEO, Sabrient Systems LLC

The S&P 500 rose 20.8% during the first three quarters of 2024, which is its best start since 1997 and the best for any presidential election year in history. Moreover, for perspective, the ratio of US stock market capitalization to the global stock market has risen from 30% in 2009 (following the GFC) to almost 50% today. This has happened despite escalation in multiple wars, numerous catastrophic weather events ravaging the country, a highly contentious election tearing apart friends and families, strapped consumers (after 25%+ cumulative inflation over the past few years), falling consumer confidence, and jobs and GDP growth over-reliant on government deficit spending, with national debt approaching $35.7 trillion and rising $2 trillion/year (as debt carrying costs alone cost over $1 trillion/year). Even over the past several days when oil prices spiked above $75/bbl (on sudden escalation in the Middle East conflict) and bond yields surged (with the 10-year reaching 4.05%), the major indexes continue to hold near their highs.

As investor Howard Lindzon (of StockTwits fame) said the other day, “There is a fear trade happening (e.g., gold and bitcoin) while there is growth trade happening. It’s really mind-boggling.” Indeed, many of the most prominent investors are wary, including the likes of Warren Buffett, Jamie Dimon, and Jeff Bezos, and corporate insider buying has slowed.

I’m not an economist. I started my career as a structural engineer with Chevron Corporation, then earned an MBA in night school and moved into the business side of the company before venturing into the world of investment research. But as a long-time student of the economy and capital markets, combined with my critical-thinking nature and engineering training, I’ve developed a healthy skepticism of numbers presented to me, even from supposedly objective sources like the government. They have to pass the “smell test.”

Of course, the Fed has been basing its monetary policy primarily on metrics calculated by federal agencies regarding inflation, jobs, and GDP. But headline YoY numbers can be illusory—particularly when they are propped up by massive government deficit spending. So, I like to look beyond the headline numbers. For inflation, my skepticism of official numbers (with the long lag times of key components, like shelter cost, and distorted metrics like “owner’s equivalent rent,” which is highly subjective and based on surveys of homeowners) is why I seek alternative metrics like: 1) the annualized rolling 3-month average of month-over-month price changes (which better reflects current trends), 2) a European method (quietly published by the BLS since 2006) called the Harmonized Index of Consumer Prices (HICP), and 3) the real-time, blockchain-based Truflation, which is published daily.

My skepticism was further elevated when I saw the jobs, retail sales, and ISM Services metrics all suddenly perk up in September—right before the election after a lengthy period of decline and contrary to several negative developments like a record divergence between rising consumer credit card debt and falling personal savings and The Conference Board’s Consumer Confidence dropping to the bottom of its 2-year range and showing increasing pessimism about labor market conditions.

On the other hand, it is notable that Truflation also has risen quickly over the past couple of weeks to nearly 2.0% YoY, so could this be corroborating the apparent rise in consumer demand? Could it be that the Fed’s dovish pivot and 50-bps rate cut has suddenly emboldened consumers to start spending again and businesses to ramp up hiring? Or are my suspicions correct such that we are in store for more downward revisions on some these rosy metrics post-election? After all, the last set of major revisions in early September showed not just an over-reliance on government jobs and government-supported jobs (through targeted spending bills), but the August household survey showed 66,000 fewer employed than in August 2023, 609,000 more “”part-time for economic reasons,” and 531,000 more “part time for noneconomic reasons,” which implies 1.2 million fewer full-time jobs in August 2024 versus August 2023.

Then along came the big 254,000 jobs gain in the September report that made investors so giddy last week, and the household survey showed 314,000 more employed workers than in September of last year. However, digging into the numbers, there are 555,000 more “”part-time for economic reasons” and 389,000 more “part time for noneconomic reasons,” which suggests 630 million fewer full-time jobs in September 2024 versus September 2023, so it’s no surprise that the average weekly hours worked also fell. Furthermore, government spending (and the growing regulatory state) continues to account for much of the hiring as government jobs have soared by 785,000 (seasonally adjusted) over this 12-month timeframe, which was the largest month-over-month (MoM) gain on record. Also, workers holding multiple jobs hit an all-time high. And notably, native-born workers have lost 1.62 million net jobs since their peak employment in July 2023 while foreign-born workers have gained 1.69 million over the same period.

Hmmm. I continue to see the GDP and jobs growth numbers as something of a mirage in that they have been propped up by government deficit spending (which our leaders euphemistically call “investment”). As you recall, leading into the September FOMC announcement I had been pounding the table on the need for a 50-bps rate cut, which we indeed got. Many observers, and at least one Fed governor, believe it was a mistake to go so big, but as I discussed in my post last month, recessionary pressures were mounting despite the impressive headline numbers, and the pain felt by our trading partners from high US interest rates and a strong dollar essentially required some agreement among the major central banks, particularly Japan and China, to weaken the dollar and thus allow an expansion in global liquidity without inciting capital flight to the US. And the PBOC soon did exactly that—slashing its reserve requirement ratio (RRR), cutting its benchmark interest rate, and loosening scores of rules regarding mortgages and the property market—which has restrengthened the dollar after its summer decline.

Of course, cutting taxes and regulation is the best way to unleash the private sector, but it's often argued that a tax cut without a corresponding reduction in spending only serves to increase the budget deficit and add to the federal debt. In fact, I saw a Harris campaign commercial with an average guy named “Buddy” lamenting that it’s “not cool” with him that Trump would give “billionaires” a tax break because they should “pay their fair share.” But Buddy and Harris both need to know what DataTrek Research has observed—i.e., since 1960, regardless of individual and corporate tax rates, federal receipts have averaged 17% of GDP. This means that raising taxes stunts GDP growth while cutting taxes boosts GDP growth by leaving more money in the pockets of consumers, business owners, and corporations to spend and invest with the wisdom of a free and diverse marketplace (Adam Smith’s “invisible hand”). In other words, the path to rising tax revenues is through strong economic growth—and the best return on capital comes from the private sector, which has proven itself much more adept at determining the most efficient allocation of capital rather than Big Government’s top-down picking of winners and losers, like a politburo.

Nevertheless, given the Fed’s dovish pivot (and despite the “heavy hand” of our federal government), I continue to expect higher prices by year end and into 2025. Bond credit spreads remain tight (i.e., no fear of recession), and although the CBOE Volatility Index (VIX) is back above the 20 “fear threshold,” it is far from panic levels. So, I believe any “October surprise” that leads to a pre-election selloff—other than a cataclysmic “Black Swan” event—would likely be a welcome buying opportunity, in my view. But besides adding or maintaining exposure to the dominant MAG-7 titans—which provide defensive qualities (due to their disruptive innovation and wide moats) as well as long-term appreciation potential—I think other stocks may offer greater upside as the economic cycle continues its growth run and market rotation/broadening resumes.

So, my suggestions are to buy high-quality businesses at reasonable prices on any pullback, hold inflation hedges like gold and bitcoin, and be prepared to exploit any credit-related panic—both as stocks sell off (such as by buying out-of-the-money put options while VIX is low) and before they rebound (when share prices are low). Regardless, I continue to recommend high-quality, fundamentally strong stocks across all market caps that display consistent, reliable, and accelerating sales and earnings growth, positive revisions to Wall Street analysts’ consensus estimates, rising profit margins and free cash flow, solid earnings quality, and low debt burden. These are the factors Sabrient employs in selecting the growth-oriented Baker’s Dozen (our “Top 13” stocks), the value-oriented Forward Looking Value, the growth & income-oriented Dividend portfolio, and Small Cap Growth, which is an alpha-seeking alternative to a passive position in the Russell 2000.

We also use many of those factors in our SectorCast ETF ranking model. And notably, our Earnings Quality Rank (EQR) is a key factor in each of these models, and it is also licensed to the actively managed, absolute-return-oriented First Trust Long-Short ETF (FTLS).

Each of our key alpha factors and their usage within Sabrient’s Growth, Value, Dividend, and Small Cap investing strategies (which underly those aforementioned portfolios) is discussed in detail in Sabrient founder David Brown’s new book, How to Build High Performance Stock Portfolios, which is now available for pre-order on Amazon at a special pre-order price.

And in conjunction with David’s new book, we are also offering a subscription to our next-generation Sabrient Scorecard for Stocks, which is a downloadable spreadsheet displaying our Top 30 highest-ranked stock picks for each of those 4 investing strategies. And as a bonus, we also provide our Scorecard for ETFs that scores and ranks roughly 1,400 US-listed equity ETFs. Both Scorecards are posted weekly in Excel format and allow you to see how your stocks and ETFs rank in our system…or for identifying the top-ranked stocks and ETFs (or for weighted combinations of our alpha factors). You can learn more about both the book and the next-gen Scorecards (and download a free sample scorecard) at http://DavidBrownInvestingBook.com.

In today’s post, I discuss in greater detail the current trend in inflation, Fed monetary policy, stock valuations, technological trends, and what might lie ahead for the stock market. I also discuss Sabrient’s latest fundamental-based SectorCast quantitative rankings of the ten U.S. business sectors, current positioning of our sector rotation model, and several top-ranked ETF ideas. And be sure to check out my Final Thoughts section with a few off-topic comments on the imminent election and escalating Middle East conflict.

Click here to continue reading my full commentary online or to sign up for email delivery of this monthly market letter. Also, here is a link to this post in printable PDF format. I invite you to share it as appropriate (to the extent your compliance allows).

  by Scott Martindale
  President & CEO, Sabrient Systems LLC

Falling inflation, weak manufacturing activity, cautious consumer sentiment, and sluggish GDP and jobs growth have conspired to elicit a dovish tone from the Federal Reserve and the likely start of a rate cut cycle to avert recession and more jobs losses. I continue to pound the table that the Fed is behind the curve and should have begun to cut at the July meeting.

Why? Well, here are my key reasons:

1. Although official inflation metrics still reflect lingering “stickiness” in consumer prices, my research suggests that real-time inflation is already well below the Fed’s 2% target, as I discuss in detail in today’s post.

2. Last week’s BLS jobs report shows 66,000 fewer employed workers in August 2024 versus 12 months ago after massive downward revisions to prior reports. And if you dig deeper into the August household survey it gets worse, indicating a whopping 1.2 million fewer full-time jobs (yikes!), partially offset by a big growth in part-time jobs.

3. The mirage of modest GDP and jobs growth has been temporarily propped up by unhealthy and inefficient government deficit spending (euphemistically called “investment”) rather than true and sustainable organic growth from a vibrant private sector that is adept at efficient capital allocation. Thus, despite government efforts to “buy” growth, recessionary signals are growing at home and abroad.

4. The burden caused by elevated real interest rates on surging debt across government, business, consumers at home and emerging markets abroad, and the impact of tight monetary policy and a relatively strong dollar on our trading partners must be confronted.

So, a 50-bps cut at the September FOMC meeting next week seems warranted—even if it spooks the markets. As Chicago Fed president Austan Goolsbee said, “You only want to stay this restrictive for as long as you have to, and this doesn’t look like an overheating economy to me.”

A terminal fed funds neutral rate of 3.0-3.5% seems appropriate, in my view, which is roughly 200 bps below the current range of 5.25-5.50%). Fortunately, today’s lofty rate means the Fed has plenty of potential rate cuts in its holster to support the economy while remaining relatively restrictive in its inflation fight. And as long as the trend in global liquidity is upward (which it is once again), then it seems the risk of a major market crash is low.

Regarding the stock market, as the Magnificent Seven (MAG-7) mega-cap Tech stocks continue to flounder, markets have displayed some resilience since the cap-weighted S&P 500 and Nasdaq 100 both topped in mid-July, with investors finding opportunities in neglected market segments like financials, healthcare, industrials, and defensive/higher-dividend sectors utilities, real estate, telecom, and staples—as well as gold (as both a store of value and protection from disaster). However, economic weakness, “toppy” charts, and seasonality (especially in this highly consequential election year) all suggest more volatility and downside ahead into October.

Of course, August was tumultuous, starting with the worst one-day selloff since the March 2020 pandemic lockdown followed by a moon-shot recovery back to the highs for the S&P 500 (SPY) and S&P 400 MidCap (MDY), while the Dow Jones Industrials (DIA) surged to a new high. However, the Nasdaq 100 (QQQ) and Russell 2000 SmallCap (IWM) only partially retraced their losses. And as I said in my August post, despite the historic spike in the CBOE Volatility Index (VIX), it didn’t seem like the selloff was sufficient to shake out all the weak investors and form a solid foundation for a bullish rise into year end. I said that I expected more downside in stocks and testing of support before a tradeable bottom was formed, especially given uncertainty in what the FOMC will do on 9/18 and what the elections have in store.

In addition, September is historically the worst month for stocks, and October has had its fair share of selloffs (particularly in presidential election years). And although the extraordinary spike in fear and “blood in the streets” in early August was fleeting, the quick bounce was not convincing. The monthly charts remain quite extended (“overbought”) and are starting to roll over after August’s bearish “hanging man” candlestick—much like last summer. In fact, as I discussed in my post last month, the daily price pattern for the S&P 500 in 2024 seems to be following 2023 to a T, which suggests the weakness (like last year) could last into October before streaking higher into year end. Anxiety around a highly consequential election on 11/5 (with counting of mail-in ballots likely to last several days beyond that once again) will surely create volatility.

Many commentators believe the Fed is making a policy mistake, but it goes both ways. Some believe the Fed is turning dovish too quickly because inflation is sticky, the jobs market is fine, and GDP is holding up well, so it risks reigniting inflation. Others (like me) think the FOMC is reacting too slowly because the economy, jobs growth, and inflation are weaker than the mirage they seem, masked by inordinate government deficit spending, misleading headline metrics, and political narratives. As Fed Chair Jerome Powell said at the July meeting, “The downside risks to the employment mandate are now real,” and yet the FOMC still chose to hold off on a rate cut. Now it finds itself having to commence an easing cycle with the unwanted urgency of staving off recession rather than a more comfortable “normalization” objective within a sound economy.

Indeed, now that we are past Labor Day, it appears the “adults” are back in the trading room. As I discuss in detail in today’s post, economic metrics seem to be unraveling fast, stocks are selling off, and bonds are getting bought—with the 2-10 yield curve now “un-inverted” (10-year yield exceeds the 2-year). So, let’s get moving on rate normalization. After all, adjusting the interest rate doesn’t flip a switch on economic growth and jobs creation. It takes time for lower rates and rising liquidity to percolate and reverse downward trends, just as it took several months for higher rates and stagnant liquidity to noticeably suppress inflation. Fed funds futures today put the odds of a 50-bps cut at about 27%.

Nevertheless, stock prices are always forward-looking and speculative with respect to expectations of economic growth, corporate earnings, and interest rates, so prices will begin to recover before the data shows a broad economic recovery is underway. I continue to foresee higher prices by year end and into 2025. Moreover, I see current market weakness setting up a buying opportunity, perhaps in October. But rather than rushing back into the MAG-7 stocks exclusively, I think other stocks offer greater upside. I would suggest targeting high-quality, fundamentally strong stocks across all market caps that display consistent, reliable, and accelerating sales and earnings growth, positive revisions to Wall Street analysts’ consensus estimates, rising profit margins and free cash flow, solid earnings quality, and low debt burden. These are the factors Sabrient employs in selecting the growth-oriented Baker’s Dozen (our “Top 13” stocks), the value-oriented Forward Looking Value, the growth & income-oriented Dividend portfolio, and Small Cap Growth, which is an alpha-seeking alternative to a passive position in the Russell 2000.

We also use many of those factors in our SectorCast ETF ranking model. And notably, our Earnings Quality Rank (EQR) is a key factor in each of these models, and it is also licensed to the actively managed, absolute-return-oriented First Trust Long-Short ETF (FTLS) as an initial screen. Each of our alpha factors and their usage within Sabrient’s Growth, Value, Dividend, and Small Cap investing strategies is discussed in detail in Sabrient founder David Brown’s new book, How to Build High Performance Stock Portfolios, which will be published shortly.

In today’s post, I discuss in greater detail the current trend in inflation, Fed monetary policy, and what might lie ahead for the stock market as we close out a tumultuous Q3. I also discuss Sabrient’s latest fundamental-based SectorCast quantitative rankings of the ten U.S. business sectors, current positioning of our sector rotation model, and several top-ranked ETF ideas. And be sure to check out my Final Thoughts section with some political comments—here’s a teaser: Democrats have held the presidency for 12 of the past 16 years since we emerged from the Financial Crisis, so all these problems with the economy, inflation, immigration, and global conflict they promise to “fix” are theirs to own.

Click here to continue reading my full commentary online or to sign up for email delivery of this monthly market letter. And here is a link to it in printable PDF format. I invite you to share it as appropriate (to the extent your compliance allows).

  by Scott Martindale
  President & CEO, Sabrient Systems LLC

July saw new highs for the broad market indexes followed by a big fall from grace among the Magnificent Seven (MAG-7) stocks. But it looked more like a healthy rotation than a flight to safety, with a broadening into neglected market segments, as inflation and unemployment metrics engendered optimism about a dovish policy pivot from the Federal Reserve. The rotation of capital within the stock market—as opposed to capital flight out of stocks—kept overall market volatility modest. But then along came the notorious month of August. Is this an ominous sign that the AI hype will come crashing down as the economy goes into a recession? Or is this simply a 2023 redux—another “summer sales event” on stock prices—with rate cuts, accelerating earnings, and new highs ahead? Let’s explore the volatility spike, the reset on valuations, inflation trends, Fed policy, and whether this is a buying opportunity.

Summary

Up until this month, a pleasant and complacent trading climate had been in place essentially since the Federal Reserve announced in Q4 2023 its intended policy pivot, with a forecast of at least three rate cuts. But August is notorious for its volatility, largely from instability on the trading floor due to Wall Street vacations and exacerbated by algorithmic (computer-based) trading systems. In my early-July post, I wrote that I expected perhaps a 10% correction this summer and added, “the technicals have become extremely overbought [with] a lot of potential downside if momentum gets a head of steam and the algo traders turn bearish.” In other words, the more extreme the divergence and euphoria, the harsher the correction.

Indeed, last Monday 8/5 saw the worst one-day selloff since the March 2020 pandemic lockdown. From its all-time high on 7/16 to the intraday low on Monday 8/5 the S&P 500 (SPY) fell -9.7%, and the Technology Select Sector SPDR (XLK) was down as much as -20% from its 7/11 high. The CBOE Volatility Index (VIX) hit a colossal 67.73 at its intraday peak (although tradable VIX futures never came close to such extremes). It was officially the VIX’s third highest reading ever, after the financial crisis in 2008 and pandemic lockdown in 2020. But were the circumstances this time around truly as dire as those two previous instances? Regardless, it illustrates the inherent risk created by such narrow leadership, extreme industry divergences, and high leverage bred from persistent complacency (including leveraged short volatility and the new zero-day expiry options).

The selloff likely was ignited by the convergence of several issues, including weakening economic data and new fears of recession, a concern that the AI hype isn’t living up to its promise quite fast enough, and a cautious Fed that many now believe is “behind the curve” and making a policy mistake by not cutting rates. (Note: I have been sounding the alarm on this for months.) But it might have been Japan at the epicenter of this financial earthquake when the Bank of Japan (BoJ) suddenly hiked its key policy rate and sounded a hawkish tone, igniting a “reverse carry trade” and rapid deleveraging. I explain this further in today’s post.

Regardless, by week’s end, it looked like a non-event as the S&P 500 and Nasdaq 100 clawed back all their losses from the Monday morning collapse. So, was that it for the summer correction? Are we all good now? I would say no. A lot of traders were burned, and it seems there is more work for bulls to do to prove a bottom was established. Although the extraordinary spike in fear and “blood in the streets” was fleeting, the quick bounce was not convincing, and the monthly charts look toppy—much like last summer. In fact, as I discuss in today’s post, the market looks a lot like last year, which suggests the weakness could potentially last into October. As DataTrek opined, “Investor confidence in the macro backdrop was way too high and it may take weeks to fully correct this imbalance.”

Stock prices are always forward-looking and speculative with respect to expectations of economic growth, corporate earnings, and interest rates. The FOMC held off on a rate cut at its July meeting even though inflation is receding and recessionary signals are growing, including weakening economic indicators (at home and abroad) and rising unemployment (now at 4.3%, after rising for the fourth straight month). Moreover, the Fed must consider the cost of surging debt and the impact of tight monetary policy and a strong dollar on our trading partners. On the bright side, the Fed no longer sees the labor market as a source of higher inflation. As Fed Chair Jerome Powell said, “The downside risks to the employment mandate are now real.” 

The real-time, blockchain-based Truflation metric (which historically presages CPI) keeps falling and recently hit yet another 52-week low at just 1.38%; Core PCE ex-shelter is already below 2.5%; and the Fed’s preferred Core PCE metric will likely show it is below 2.5% as well. So, with inflation less a worry than warranted and with corporate earnings at risk from the economic slowdown, the Fed now finds itself having to start an easing cycle with the urgency of staving off recession rather than a more comfortable “normalization” objective within a sound economy. As Chicago Fed president Austan Goolsbee said, “You only want to stay this restrictive for as long as you have to, and this doesn’t look like an overheating economy to me.”

The Fed will be the last major central bank in the West to launch an easing cycle. I have been on record for months that the Fed is behind the curve, as collapsing market yields have signaled (with the 10-year Treasury note yield falling over 80 bp from its 5/29 high before bouncing). It had all the justification it needed for a 25-bp rate cut at the July FOMC meeting, and I think passing on it was a missed opportunity to calm global markets, weaken the dollar, avert a global currency crisis, and relieve some of the burden on highly indebted federal government, consumers, businesses, and the global economy. Indeed, I believe Fed inaction forced the BoJ rate hike and the sudden surge in US recession fears, leading to last week’s extreme stock market weakness (and global contagion).

In my view, a terminal fed funds “neutral” rate of 3.0-3.5% (roughly 200 bps below the current “effective” rate of 5.33%) seems appropriate. Fortunately, today’s lofty rate means the Fed has plenty of potential rate cuts in its holster to support the economy while still remaining relatively restrictive in its inflation fight. And as long as the trend in global liquidity is upward, then the risk of a major market crash this year is low, in my view. Even though the Fed has kept rates “higher for longer” throughout this waiting game on inflation, it has also maintained liquidity in the financial system, which of course is the lifeblood of economic growth and risk assets. Witness that, although corporate credit spreads surged during the selloff and market turmoil (especially high yield spreads), they stayed well below historical levels and fell back quickly by the end of the week.

So, I believe this selloff, even if further downside is likely, should be considered a welcome buying opportunity for long-term investors, especially for those who thought they had missed the boat on stocks this year. This assumes that the proverbial “Fed Put” is indeed back in play, i.e., a willingness to intervene to support markets (like a protective put option) through asset purchases to reduce interest rates and inject liquidity (aka quantitative easing). The Fed Put also serves to reduce the term premium on bonds as investors are more willing to hold longer-duration securities.

Longer term, however, is a different story, as our massive federal debt and rampant deficit spending is not only unsustainable but potentially catastrophic for the global economy. The process of digging out of this enormous hole will require sustained, solid, organic economic growth (supported by lower tax rates), modest inflation (to devalue the debt without crippling consumers), and smaller government (restraint on government spending and “red tape”), in my view, as I discuss in today’s post.

In buying the dip, the popular Big Tech stocks got creamed. However, this served to bring down their valuations somewhat, their capital expenditures and earnings growth remains robust, and hedge funds are generally underweight Tech, so this “revaluation” could bode well for a broader group of Tech stocks for the balance of the year. Rather than rushing back into the MAG-7, I would suggest targeting high-quality, fundamentally strong stocks across all market caps that display consistent, reliable, and accelerating sales and earnings growth, positive revisions to Wall Street analysts’ consensus estimates, rising profit margins and free cash flow, solid earnings quality, and low debt burden. These are the factors Sabrient employs in selecting our growth-oriented Baker’s Dozen, value-oriented Forward Looking Value (which just launched on 7/31), growth & income-oriented Dividend portfolio, and the Small Cap Growth (an alpha-seeking alternative to a passive position in the Russell 2000).

We also use many of those factors in our SectorCast ETF ranking model. And notably, our Earnings Quality Rank (EQR) is a key factor in each of these models, and it is also licensed to the actively managed, absolute-return-oriented First Trust Long-Short ETF (FTLS) as an initial screen.

Each of our alpha factors and their usage within Sabrient’s Growth, Value, Dividend income, and Small Cap investing strategies is discussed in detail in Sabrient founder David Brown’s new book, How to Build High Performance Stock Portfolios, which will be published this month (I will send out a notification).

Click here to continue reading my full commentary, in which I go into greater detail on the economy, inflation, monetary policy, valuations, and Sabrient’s latest fundamental-based SectorCast quantitative rankings of the ten U.S. business sectors, current positioning of our sector rotation model, and several top-ranked ETF ideas. Also, here is a link to this post in printable PDF format. I invite you to share it as appropriate (to the extent compliance allows). You also can sign up for email delivery of this periodic newsletter at Sabrient.com.

  by Scott Martindale
  President & CEO, Sabrient Systems LLC

The New York Fed’s Global Supply Chain Pressure Index (GSCPI) for November was released today, and although it rose more than expected (likely due to disruptions from heightened global hostilities), it still suggests inflation will continue its gradual retreat, with a reading near the long-run average. But let me start by talking about October’s inflation indicators. Last week, the headline reading for Personal Consumption Expenditures (PCE) for October came in at 3.0% YoY, helped quite a bit by the fall in oil and gasoline prices (note: the US is producing an all-time high of 13.2 million barrels/day of crude oil). Core PCE, which is the Federal Reserve's preferred inflation metric, came in at 3.46% year-over-year. However, the month-over-month number for October versus September, which better reflects today's inflation trends and the lag effects of higher interest rates, came in at 0.16%, which annualizes to 1.98%. Keep in mind, the Fed's inflation target is 2.0%. But monthly data can be choppy, so looking at the rolling 3-month average, it annualizes to 2.37%.

Earlier reports had shown October PPI at 1.3% YoY and CPI at 3.2%, with core PPI (excluding food & energy) was 2.4% YoY, and core CPI was 4.0%. All of this was presaged by the GSCPI, which measures the number of standard deviations from the historical average value (aka Z-score) and generally foreshadows movements in inflation metrics. It plummeted from a December 2021 all-time high of +4.31 down to the October reading of -1.74—its lowest level ever. However, that ultra-low October reading has been revised to -0.39 due to “a change in exchange rate weighting methodology,” according to the New York Fed. Nevertheless, the writing was on the wall for last week’s favorable PCE report. The chart below illustrates the correlation between GSCPI, PPI, and CPI.

So, what to expect for November inflation? Well, as shown in the chart, GSCPI for November just came in today at 0.11. Although rising from its ultra-low levels, it still remains at the long-run average, and the chart illustrates that volatility is to be expected. All in all, I think it still bodes well for the next week’s CPI/PPI readings as supply chains continue to heal and diversify (albeit with occasional hiccups like we see today from heightened global hostilities), especially when you also consider that the consumer has become stretched with rising household debt and falling growth in job openings and wages, money supply growth is stagnant, and budget hawks are increasingly flexing their fiscal muscles in Congress. Thus, I believe the probability of a resurgence in either inflation or fiscal expansion is quite low.

Furthermore, although the second estimate for Q3 GDP was ultra-strong (the highest in 2 years), revised up to 5.2% annual rate (from previous 4.9%), the boost came from state and federal government spending, which was revised up to 5.5% from the prior estimate of 4.6% (i.e., more unsustainable deficit spending and issuance of Treasuries paying high coupons, mostly from an 8.2% increase in defense spending), while personal consumption was revised down to 3.6% from 4.0%. This tells me the “robust” GDP number was something of an illusion.

Indeed, looking ahead, the Atlanta Fed’s GDPNow forecasts only 1.3% GDP growth and 1.9% PCE growth for Q4 (as of 12/6). Moreover, the good folks at Real Investment Advice observed that Gross Domestic Income (GDI) for Q3 was reported at only +1.5%, displaying the widest gap below GDP in 50 years. (Note: GDP measures the value of goods and services produced, including consumption expenditures, investments and exports, while GDI measures incomes earned and costs incurred in production of GDP, including wages, profits, and taxes.) Also, last week’s Fed Beige Book showed that two-thirds of Fed districts reported slower economic activity over the prior six weeks, and the ISM Manufacturing Index came in at an anemic 46.7, showing continued contraction for the 15th straight month.

So, this all seems to be more “bad news is good news” when it comes to Fed policy moves, and investors will be eagerly watching Friday’s jobs report followed by next week’s CPI, PPI, and FOMC policy announcement. Stocks have been taking a healthy breather and consolidation in anticipation of it all, but so far, no major pullback. This year seems to be following the playbook of what economist Ed Yardeni has characterized as a series of “rolling recessions” (among sectors) and an “Immaculate Disinflation,” i.e., moderating inflation without a harsh recession or massive layoffs. As an aside, I have opined many times that it is ridiculous that we constantly find ourselves awaiting the edict of this unelected board of “wise elders” to decide our economic fate. Why can’t they take emergency measures only when absolutely necessary to avert economic cataclysm, and then once the crisis has passed, those emergency measures are quickly withdrawn so that the free market can get back to doing its productive, creative, wonderful thing? One can dream.

Regardless, in my view, the Fed is likely done with rate hikes and preparing for its eventual pivot to rate cuts—which I think will come sooner than most expect, likely before the end of H1 2024. Why? Because if inflation maintains its gradual downtrend while the Fed holds its overnight borrowing rate steady, the real (inflation-adjusted) rate keeps rising, i.e., de facto tightening. Indeed, Fed funds futures are projecting 98% chance for no rate change next week, and for 2024, 62% chance for at least one 25-bp rate cut by March, 97% for at least one 25-bp cut by June, and 89% chance of a full 1.0% in total rate cuts by December 2024, which would put the fed funds rate below 4.5%.

Accordingly, after kissing the 5% handle, the 10-year Treasury yield has fallen precipitously to below 4.2%—a level last seen at the end of August. So, I encourage and expect the FOMC to follow the message of the bond market and begin cutting the fed funds rate back towards the neutral rate, which I think is around 2.5-3.0% nominal (i.e., 2% target inflation plus 0.5-1.0% r-star), and hand back control of the economy to the free market. As of now, the Fed is on the verge of crushing the housing market…and by extension the broader economy. In addition, it must ensure money supply resumes a modest growth rate (albeit slowly), not continue to shrink or stagnate.

To be sure, the safe steadiness of bond yields was disrupted this year. After rising much faster than anyone anticipated, interest rates have fallen much faster than expected, especially considering that the Fed hasn’t made any dovish policy changes. Nevertheless, if rates are going to generally meander lower, investors might be expected to lock in sustainable yield with capital appreciation potential through longer-duration securities, including long-term bonds, “bond proxies” like dividend-paying equities (e.g., utilities, staples, and REITs), and growth stocks (like high-quality technology companies).

I also like oil, gold and uranium stocks, as well as gold, silver, and cryptocurrency as stores of value in an uncertain macro climate. Notably, gold is challenging its highs of the past few years as global investors and central banks are both hedging and/or speculating on a weaker dollar, falling real interest rates, rising geopolitical tensions, and potential financial crisis, and the World Gold Council reported robust demand among central banks, which purchased a record 800 tons during the first three quarters of the year. Similarly, Bitcoin is catching a bid on speculation of broader investor access (through spot-price ETFs) and dollar debasement (if debt and deficit spending continue to spiral).

Keep in mind that, when valuations get lofty within a given asset class, volatility and performance/valuation dispersion among stocks often increases while correlations decrease. For stocks, active selection strategies that can exploit the dispersion to identify under-the-radar and undervalued companies primed for explosive growth become more appealing versus passive index investing. Sabrient’s actively selected portfolios include the Q4 2023 Baker’s Dozen (launched on 10/20), Small Cap Growth 40 (launched on 11/3), and Sabrient Dividend 46 (just launched on 11/29, and today offers a 4.7% dividend yield).

In today’s post, I further discuss inflation, the US dollar, Fed monetary policy implications, and relative performance of asset classes. I also discuss Sabrient’s latest fundamentals based SectorCast quantitative rankings of the ten U.S. business sectors (which is topped by Technology and Industrials), current positioning of our sector rotation model (which turned bullish in early November and remains so), and some actionable ETF trading ideas.

Click here to continue reading my full commentary … or if you prefer, here is a link to this post in printable PDF format (as some of my readers have requested).

  by Scott Martindale
  President & CEO, Sabrient Systems LLC

The year began with the market showing resilience in the face of the Fed’s rate hikes, balance sheet contraction, hawkish rhetoric, and willingness to inflict further economic pain, including a recession and rising unemployment (if that’s what it takes). Of course, we also had a treacherous geopolitical landscape of escalating aggression by Russia in Ukraine, by China (regarding both Ukraine and Taiwan), and North Korea (persistent rocket launches and saber-rattling). But really, the direction for stocks came down to the trend in inflation and the Fed’s response—and the latest readings on CPI and especially PPI are quite encouraging. But alas, it now appears it isn’t quite that simple, as we have a burgeoning banking crisis to throw another monkey wrench into the mix. As Roseanne Roseannadanna used to say in the early Saturday Night Live sketches, "It just goes to show you, it's always something—if it ain't one thing, it's another."

I warned in my January post that 1H 2023 would be volatile as investors searched for clarity amid a fog of macro uncertainties. And I often opine that the Fed can’t rapidly raise rates on a heavily leveraged economy—which was incentivized by ZIRP and massive money supply growth to speculate for higher returns—without fallout (aka “breaking something”). Besides impacts like exporting inflation and societal turmoil to our trading partners, the rapid pace of rate hikes has quickly lowered the value of bank reserves (as bond prices fell). Last week this in turn led to massive portfolio losses and a federal takeover for SVB Financial (SIVB) which caters to California’s start-up and technology community, as it was pushed into selling reserves to meet an onslaught of customer withdrawals. The normally stable 2-year T-Note spiked, crashing its yield by over 100 bps in just a few days. Other regional banks have required rescue or support as well, including stalwarts like Signature Bank (SBNY) and First Republic (FRC)…and then scandal-prone European behemoth Credit Suisse (CS) revealed “material weaknesses” in its accounting…and Moody’s cut its outlook on US banks from stable to negative. So, something indeed broke in the financial system.

Fortunately, inflation fears were somewhat assuaged this week, as all reports showed trends that the Fed (and investors) hoped to see. February CPI registered 6.0%, which is the lowest reading since September 2021. Despite the historical observation that a CPI above 5% has never come back down to a desirable level without the fed funds rate exceeding CPI, we already have seen CPI fall substantially from 9.1% last June without fed funds even cracking the 5% handle, much less 6%—and CPI is a lagging indicator. So, given the 12 encouraging signs I describe in my full post below, I believe the writing is on the wall, so to speak, for a continued inflation downtrend.

So, the question is, will the Fed feel it must follow-through on its hawkish inflation-busting jawboning at the FOMC meeting next week to force the economy into recession? Or will recovering supply chains (including manufacturing, transportation, logistics, energy, labor) and disinflationary secular trends continue to provide the restraint on wage and price inflation that the Fed seeks without having to double-down on its intervention/manipulation?

My expectation is the latter—and it’s not just due to the sudden banking crisis magnifying fragility in our economy. Nothing goes in a straight line for long, and inflation is no different, i.e., the path is volatile, but disinflationary trends remain intact. I talk more about this in my full post below. Regardless, given the anemic GDP growth forecast (well below inflation) and the historical 90% correlation between economic growth and aggregate corporate profits, the passive broad-market mega-cap-dominated indexes that have been so hard for active managers to beat in the past may well continue to see volatility.

Nevertheless, many individual companies—particularly within the stronger sectors—could still do well. Thus, investors may be better served by pursuing equal-weight and strategic-beta ETFs as well as active strategies that can exploit the performance dispersion among individual stocks—which should be favorable for Sabrient’s portfolios, including the newest Q1 2023 Baker’s Dozen, Small Cap Growth 37, and Dividend 43 (offering both capital appreciation potential and a current yield of 5.2%), all of which combine value, quality, and growth factors while providing exposure to both longer-term secular growth trends and shorter-term cyclical growth opportunities.

Quick plug for Sabrient’s newest product, a stock and ETF screening and scoring tool called SmartSheets, which comprise two simple downloadable spreadsheets that provide access to 9 of our proprietary quant scores. Prior to the sudden fall of SIVB, on a scale of 0-100 with 100 the “best,” our rankings showed SIVB carried a low score in our proprietary Earnings Quality Rank of 35, a GARP (growth at a reasonable price) score of 37, and a BEAR score (relative performance in weak market conditions) of 13. Also worth mentioning, Lantheus Holdings (LNTH) was consistently ranked our #1 GARP stock for the first several months of the year before it knocked its earnings report out of the park on 2/23 and shot up over +20% in one day. (Note: you can find our full Baker’s Dozen performance details here.) Feel free to download the latest weekly sheets using the link above—free of charge for now—and please send us your feedback!

Here is a link to a printable version of this post. In this periodic update, I provide a comprehensive market commentary, offer my technical analysis of the S&P 500 chart, review Sabrient’s latest fundamentals based SectorCast quant rankings of the ten U.S. business sectors, and serve up some actionable ETF trading ideas. To summarize, our SectorCast rankings reflect a slightly bullish-to-neutral bias, the technical picture looks short-term oversold, and our sector rotation model has taken a defensive posture. Technology has taken over the top position in our sector rankings. Read on…

  by Scott Martindale
  President & CEO, Sabrient Systems LLC

The future direction of both stocks and bonds hinges on the trajectory of corporate earnings and interest rates, both of which are largely at the mercy of inflation, Fed monetary policy, and the state of the economy (e.g., recession). So far, 2023 is off to an impressive start, with both stocks and bonds surging higher on speculation that inflation will continue to subside, the Fed will soon pause rate hikes, the economy will endure at most a mild recession, China reopens, and corporate earnings will hold up…not to mention, stocks have risen in the year following a midterm election in every one of the past 20 cycles. The CBOE Volatility Index (VIX) is at a 52-week low.

Moreover, although inflation and interest rates surged much higher than I predicted at the beginning of 2022, my broad storyline around inflation and Fed policy remains intact:  i.e., a softening of its hawkish jawboning, followed by slower rate hikes and some balance sheet runoff (QT), a pause (or neutral pivot) to give the rapid rate hikes a chance to marinate (typically it takes 9-12 months for a rate hike to have its full effect), and then as inflation readings retreat and/or recession sets in, rate cuts commence leading to an extended relief rally and perhaps the start of a new (and lasting) bull market. Investors seem to be trying to get a jump on that rally. Witness the strength in small caps, which tend to outperform during recoveries from bear markets. However, I think it could be a “bull trap” …at least for now.

Although so far consumer spending, corporate earnings, and profitability have held up, I don’t believe we have the climate quite yet for a sustained bull run, which will require an actual Fed pause on rate hikes and more predictable policy (an immediate dovish pivot probably not necessary), better visibility on corporate earnings, and lower market volatility. Until we get greater clarity, I expect more turbulence in the stock market. In my view, the passive, broad-market, mega-cap-dominated indexes that have been so hard for active managers to beat in the past may see further weakness during H1 2023. The S&P 500 might simply gyrate in a trading range, perhaps 3600–4100.

But there is hope for greater clarity as we get closer to H2 2023. If indeed inflation continues to recede, China reopens, the war in Ukraine doesn’t draw in NATO (or turn nuclear), the dollar weakens, and bond yields fall further, then investor interest should broaden beyond value and defensive names to include well-valued growth stocks help to fuel a surge in investor confidence. I believe both stocks and bonds will do well this year, and the classic 60/40 stock/bond allocation model should regain its appeal.

Regardless, even if the major indexes falter, that doesn’t mean all stocks will fall. Indeed, certain sectors (most notably Energy) should continue to thrive, in my view, so long as the global economy doesn’t sink into a deep recession. Quality and value have regained their former luster (and the value factor has greatly outperformed the growth factor over the past year), which means active selection and smart beta strategies that can exploit the performance dispersion among individual stocks seem poised to continue to beat passive indexing in 2023—a climate in which Sabrient’s approach tends to thrive.

For example, our Q4 2021 Baker’s Dozen, which launched on 10/20/21 and terminates on Friday 1/20/23, is outperforming by a wide margin all relevant market benchmarks (including various mid- and small-cap indexes, both cap-weighted and equal-weight) with a gross total return of +9.3% versus -10.2% for the S&P 500 as of 1/13, which implies a +19.5% active return, led by a diverse group encompassing two oil & gas firms, an insurer, a retailer, and a semiconductor equipment company. Later in this post, I show performance for all of Sabrient’s live portfolios—including the Baker’s Dozen, Forward Looking Value, Small Cap Growth, and Dividend (which offers a 4.7% current yield). Each leverages our enhanced model that combines Value, Quality, and Growth factors to provide exposure to both longer-term secular growth trends and shorter-term cyclical growth and value-based opportunities. By the way, the new Q1 2023 Baker’s Dozen launches on 1/20.

Here is a link to a printable version of this post. In this periodic update to start the new year, I provide a comprehensive market commentary, discuss the performance of Sabrient’s live portfolios, offer my technical analysis of the S&P 500 chart, review Sabrient’s latest fundamentals based SectorCast quant rankings of the ten U.S. business sectors, and serve up some actionable ETF trading ideas. To summarize, our SectorCast rankings reflect a modestly bullish bias, the technical picture looks short-term overbought but mid-term neutral, and our sector rotation model remains in a neutral posture. Energy continues to sit atop our sector rankings, given its still ultra-low (single digit) forward P/E and expectations for strong earnings growth, given likely upside pricing pressure on oil due to the end of Strategic Petroleum Reserve releases (and flip to purchases), continued sanctions on Russia, and China’s reopening…and assuming we see only a mild recession and a second half recovery. Read on…