The stock market and economy are two very different animals
from blog of abnormal returns March 15th, 2013
I think one of the hardest things for novice investors to
grasp is the idea that the economy and stock market are two very different
animals. In fact I start a chapter on Equities in my book Abnormal Returns:
Winning Strategies from the Frontlines of the Investment Blogosphere with the
title: “The Stock Market is Not the Economy.” There
is ample data to show that a negative relationship exists between economic
growth and equity market returns. What this relationship omits is valuation.
Starting valuations have a big role in future returns, not economic growth.
This theme about the perceived disconnect between the
stock market and economy has been touched on by a number of writers this past
week.* Josh Brown at The Reformed Broker post-debate on the link between the
two had this to say:
It’s a difficult concept to grasp when you’re trained to
look for narratives and storylines as most journalists are. Steve is a very
good economic reporter and brings a wealth of information to the viewers each
time he’s on. I was simply trying to make the
point that the Greek stock market had risen by 30% last year despite a contracting
economy while in Shanghai stocks were down all year as the Chinese economy grew
by 7%. Thus, the Economy ≠ the Stock Market.
Barry Ritholtz writing at the Washington Post has an
article arguing not only does economic have a limited role in investor decision
making but so do political machinations as well. Barry also notes the
importance of valuation on decision making as well.
Most folks seem surprised when I tell them the sequester
will have “little or no” impact on markets. The
correlation between how markets perform relative to economic events is actually
quite weak…Indeed, the correlation between
economic noise and how equity markets perform has been wildly overemphasized.
To quote Warren Buffett: “If you knew
what was going to happen in the economy, you still wouldn’t necessarily know
what was going to happen in the stock market.”
Peter Coy at Businessweek does not one feedback mechanism
between the stock market and the economy. One that the Fed is hoping will
happen sooner rather than later.
The stock market’s importance is more
symbolic than economic. Only a handful of companies use it to raise money in
a typical year, and most families have more wealth in real estate than in
stocks. What higher stock prices do is signal to CEOs that
investors want them to put their money to work. Farmer argues that rising stock prices may yet rouse
dormant animal spirits and get the economy going again. If that’s so, then the
Fed’s strategy will have worked.
Although not directly related to the earlier discussion I
thought this piece by François Sicart at AlphaNow was interesting in that it
delineates the differences between the goals of the entrepreneur and the stock
market investor. They have very different outlooks and one shouldn’t
approach stock market investing with the same attitude entrepreneurs bring to
the table.
The primary goal of an entrepreneur is to
create a fortune, in part by taking significant risk when necessary and when
the potential return warrants it. The goal of an investment
manager is to protect a patrimony against (or through) economic, political, or
financial crises – as well as against the loss of purchasing power due to
inflation. With the right discipline, this patrimony should also grow over
time.
But the successful entrepreneur and the successful
investment manager have different skill sets and instincts. Good judgment
demands that one should not attempt to practice in the other’s field of
excellence.
We want to believe the stock market
and economy are inextricably linked. That is what the financial news
industry is built upon. The economic indicator
announcement is a staple of business TV. Maybe that is yet another good reason
to go on a “news diet.”
*Although one could argue like Joe Weisenthal at Money
Game does that the stock market has been moving in lockstep with initial weekly
unemployment claims over the past six years.
No comments:
Post a Comment