Scott Martindale  by Scott Martindale
  President & CEO, Sabrient Systems LLC

Overview:

The year began with impressive strength and resilience in risk assets despite all the uncertainties around tariffs, trade wars, hot wars, slowing GDP growth, inflation, stagflation, AI impact and capex, and myriad other concerns. The US was considered the rock in a recessionary world, attracting massive foreign capital flight (according to Nasdaq, total foreign holdings of US equities as of June 2024 was $17 trillion—almost double versus 2019). But once the dam broke, stocks, crypto, and the US dollar started melting down in a “waterfall decline” culminating in a “flash crash” on Monday with the CBOE Volatility Index (VIX) nearly hitting 30 before closing at 27.86. As the adage goes, “Stocks take the stairs up and the elevator down.” But I believe this is a valuation-driven correction, as stocks had become “priced for perfection,” and the rapid meltdown ultimately will give way to a gradual melt-up, driven by rising global liquidity, a weaker US dollar, reduced wasteful government spending, lower tax and interest rates, less regulatory red tape, and the “animal spirits” of a rejuvenated private sector and housing market.

Prop desks and algorithmic trading systems hit sell stops to exacerbate the selloff, with many flipping from long to short exposure, and markets imploded as average investors quickly swung from extreme greed to extreme fear. According to Real Investment Advice, “The last time the market was this oversold and 3 standard deviations below the [50-day moving average] was in August of last year during the 10% correction as the Yen Carry Trade erupted.” The AAII weekly sentiment survey hit a bearish extreme of 60% on 2/26, after surging from 40% just one week earlier when the S&P 500 was at an all-time high. However, it’s important to note that stocks have historically recovered quite impressively over the 12 months following such extreme bearish readings.

The rising bond term premium in Q4 suggested that investors were becoming increasingly anxious about rising deficits and inflation, which also pushed gold higher. Meanwhile, the Fed has maintained tight monetary policy—and high real interest rates—given the uptick in inflation and apparently solid employment reports. However, I have consistently argued that the real-time inflation trend (without the lag in key components) has been falling and that massive government spending and hiring masked underlying issues with growth and employment in the private sector. So, this is not due to anything the new administration has done. As Renaissance Macro economist Neil Dutta recently opined, "[President Trump] inherited an economy with deep imbalances and a frozen housing and labor market."

In fact, John Burns Research & Consulting has observed that 3.8 million employees work directly for the government, but an additional 7.5 million workers indirectly receive some or all of their wages from the government—which totals 11.3 million workers or roughly 8% of the total US workforce (134 million) and accounts for much of the jobs growth. This is why I continue to advocate for both smaller government and another 100 bps in Fed rate cuts to achieve a neutral fed funds rate around 3.5% and stimulate private sector growth. As a result, I would expect a 10-year yield to stabilize around 4.0-4.5%, which would justify a forward P/E multiple for the S&P 500 around 20x (i.e., an earnings yield of 5%).

From their highs this year, “the S&P 500 and crypto have erased a combined -$5.5 trillion of market cap,” according to The Kobeissi Letter. The highflyers have led the carnage, most notably semiconductor stocks. Meta Platforms (META) is the only MAG-7 stock still positive YTD, while defensive sectors (like staples, telecom, and utilities), gold and silver miners, low/minimum volatility, value, high dividend payers, REITs, and long-duration bonds are among the best performers. The fact that bonds have caught a bid and credit spreads remain tight are positive signs that investors do not fear recession (or economic collapse). But investors continue to be shy about the amount and duration of tariffs, the aggressive DOGE actions, timing of fiscal policy implementation (tax cuts and deregulation), and Fed monetary policy (a Fed put?), and the collective impact on jobs, inflation, GDP growth, and risk asset prices as they retreat from historically high valuations.

To be sure, the Big Tech darlings had become overvalued, which is why the equal-weight versions of the S&P 500 and Nasdaq 100 have held up significantly better during the selloff. But keep in mind, the first year of a 4-year presidential term is typically the most volatile during the transition to new policies—and Trump 2.0 (“wrecking-ball”) policies are bringing quite a change from the norm. As Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said, “The economy has become hooked [on government spending], and there is going to be a detox period.”

So, knowing that he must show significant progress before the 2026 midterms, Trump is “ripping off the band-aid” to fully reveal the infected wound and wasting no time in addressing it with what he and his team strongly believes are healing policies that will restructure our nation for long-term prosperity, public safety, and national security. This is why his popularity among younger voters is holding firm. Although not nearly as extreme, it is like what Javier Milei has done to resurrect Argentina. I expect the political, economic, and market fallout will take its course during H1 2025 before giving way to a rapid building process during H2.

Investors have been increasingly scared away from risk assets at least partly due to the constant carping from both the mainstream media (MSM) and social media (usually misleadingly) about a “growth scare” (as the Atlanta Fed’s GDPNow forecast for Q1 plummeted to a recessionary -2.4% annualized growth rate), an “inflation scare” (due to tariffs, chickens, and migrant deportations), an “AI scare” (as China may be usurping our dominance with cheaper models, a “trade war scare” (as we alienate our international allies and trading partners), and various other scares that escape me at the moment (perhaps a “Hollywood exodus scare,” as celebs move out of country?). This diversified fearmongering has finally come to roost leading to the rapid unwinding of crowded long trades.

But no matter what you think of the longstanding system of global trade and whether the US was being taken advantage of, there is no doubting that the fiscal path we were on was unsustainable, with a bloated and intractable bureaucracy, wasteful boondoggles, entrenched interests, and funding of corruption, graft, fraud, racketeering, cronyism, kickbacks, and obfuscation both at home and around the world. Until now, no president has been willing or able to adequately address it, including Trump 1.0. But the new Trump 2.0 administration came in well prepared (and with a voter majority mandate) to tackle it head on. I have come to appreciate the method to our president’s apparent madness, as I discuss in my full post.

So, is this selloff likely to become a buyable dip rather than the start of a bear market? I would say yes. Although there might be some further volatility into the 4/2 tariff implementation date and perhaps the 4/15 Tax Day, I expect higher prices ahead. Why? First, from a short-term technical standpoint, the S&P 500, Nasdaq 100, and Dow Jones Industrials have diverged well below their 20-day moving averages, and they seem to have found support around their critical 300-day moving averages. Second, from a longer-term standpoint, despite all this chaos and turmoil from an administration emboldened to reverse and repair decades of neglect (and a continual “kicking the can down the road” for future generations to suffer the consequences), I remain optimistic that after some short-term pain during this transition period—including upticks in inflation, debt, and market volatility and a downtick in economic growth—the private sector will be equipped and unleashed to drive robust economic growth through productive, high-ROI investments and hiring.

In addition, as DataTrek Research recently observed, stocks have only fallen more than 10% in a given year in just 12 of the past 97 years, and each was driven either by a new hot war, recession (generally related to an oil price shock), or a Fed policy mistake—none of which are likely. So, don’t be too bearish. And as for a long entry point, the VIX can provide some guidance. It closed above 27 this week, which DataTrek considers to be a “capitulation” signal to consider getting back into stocks. And don’t forget all the cash sitting in money market funds earning those juicy risk-free rates. As money market rates recede, some of that cash may finally find its way into stocks at these more favorable valuations. Indeed, the rising price of gold may be signaling a global dovish pivot and massive liquidity support, as I discuss in my full post.

Yes, liquidity is key to keeping us out of a recession and a bear market in risk assets. Lower interest rates and a weaker US dollar are long-term economic tailwinds, while debt reduction is a short-term headwind until a rejuvenated (and turbocharged) private sector makes up for the lower deficit spending.

I expect the S&P 500 to rise above 6500 before year-end with a modest double-digit gain. Could it take longer for the expected fiscal stimulus (lower tax and interest rates, less red tape, and smaller government) to serve alongside the incredible promise of AI (on productivity, efficiency, and speed of product development) to boost the GDP such that the 6500 mark isn’t achieved until next year? Sure. But I think ultimately an economy driven by organic private sector growth is stronger and more reliable and sustainable than one driven by government (deficit) spending bills. As Elon Musk opined, “A more accurate measure of GDP would exclude government spending… Otherwise, you can scale GDP artificially high by spending money on things that don’t make people’s lives better.”

In the view of Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, we have “a generational opportunity to unleash a new economic golden age that will create more jobs, wealth and prosperity for all Americans.” Indeed, if the fed funds rate begins to come down toward my 3.5% target, today’s slightly elevated valuations can be justified given solid corporate earnings growth, a high ratio of corporate profits to GDP, and the promise of continued margin growth across all industries due to the promise of rising productivity, efficiency, and product development speed from Generative AI, Large Language Models (LLMs), and Big Data. AI investment is not slowing down but simply shifting from a singular “builder” focus to a broader focus on AI applications. This is where productivity enhancement will shift into gear. And don’t forget energy, as affordable power is the lifeblood of an economy. Costs must stay low, and Trump 2.0 is prioritizing energy independence and lower energy costs.

Because this market correction was led by the bull market-leading MAG-7 stocks and all things AI related, investors now have a second chance to get positions in some of those mega-cap titans at more attractive prices. Notably, some of these names have seen their valuations retreat such that they are once again scoring well in Sabrient’s growth models (as found in our next-gen Sabrient Scorecards subscription product)—including names like Amazon (AMZN), NVIDIA (NVDA), Salesforce (CRM), Arista Networks (ANET), Fortinet (FTNT), Palo Alto Networks (PANW), Palantir (PLTR), Microsoft (MSFT), and Taiwan Semiconductor (TSM). Our models focus on high quality and fundamental strength, with a history of consistent, reliable, and accelerating sales and earnings growth, positive revisions to Wall Street analysts’ consensus forward estimates, rising profit margins and free cash flow, solid earnings quality, and low debt burden. These are factors Sabrient employs in selecting our portfolios and 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).

Sabrient founder David Brown describes these (and other) factors and his portfolio construction process in his new book, How to Build High Performance Stock Portfolios, which is available on Amazon for investors of all experience levels. David describes his path from NASA engineer on the Apollo 11 moon landing project to creating quant models for ranking stocks and building stock portfolios in four distinct investing styles—growth, value, dividend, or small cap growth. You can learn more about David's book, as well as the companion subscription product (Sabrient Scorecards) that does most of the stock evaluation work for you, by visiting: https://HighPerformanceStockPortfolios.com.

As you might expect from former engineers, Sabrient employs the scientific method and hypothesis-testing to build quantitative models that make sense. We have become best known for our “Baker’s Dozen” portfolio of 13 diverse growth-at-a-reasonable-price (GARP) stocks, which is packaged and distributed quarterly to the financial advisor community as a unit investment trust through First Trust Portfolios, along with three other offshoot strategies based on value, dividend, and small cap investing.

Click HERE to continue reading my full post (and to sign up for email delivery). I examine in greater detail the “growth scare,” inflation, tariffs, and DOGE shock, equity valuations, and what lies ahead. 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. Also, here is a link to this post in printable PDF format.

Scott Martindale  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.