Research Rec.: Matthews Corp. (MATW) at $29.04

WARNING: The consideration of this stock can only be done with an understanding that we're in a bear market. Please carefully consider the downside risks mentioned in this research recommendation before taking any actions. Despite the possible qualitative attributes of this company, the purchase of this stock should be considered speculative at this point in time.

According to MergentOnline, Matthews International (MATW) is, "a designer, manufacturer and marketer principally of memorialization products and brand products and services. Memorialization products consist primarily of bronze memorials and other memorialization products, caskets and cremation equipment for the cemetery and funeral home industries. Brand products and services include graphics imaging products and services, marking products, as well as merchandising products and services. Co.'s products and operations are comprised of six business segments: Bronze, Casket, Cremation, Graphics Imaging, Marking Products and Merchandising Solutions." Some would think that this business is a "no-brainer" to make money in. However, my experience is that companies in the funeral services industry have a hard time retaining their focus on their core competencies and profitability.

As a Dividend Achiever, MATW has increased its dividend every year for 14 years in a row according to MergentOnline. Yesterday March 30th, MATW eased to a new low after reaching a peak of $58.55 in September 2008. The fact that MATW was able to reach a new high in the middle of September 2008 is an astounding feat. However, the following decline has resulted in a near 50% decline as of March 30th.

According to Dow's theory, MATW has the following upside and downside targets:

Upside targets:

• $31.87
• $40.77
• $49.66

Downside targets:

• $26.19
• $ 10
• $5
  

Again, considerable attention must be directed at the prospect for the downside risk since we are in a bear market. Anyone buying this stock should be willing to accept that this company can easily go down to the $10 or $5 level or a loss of 64% and 82% respectively.

The fundamentals about this company are fair. However, of particular importance is the fact that MATW has an 11% dividend payout ratio. This is instrumental to the success of the company getting through the deepening recession.

Your own research of the funeral services industry will reveal that while death is certain only a few companies have managed to succeed at making money on a consistent basis. It is hoped that MATW is the right company for an otherwise difficult business. Touc.

Research Rec.: Meridian Bioscience (VIVO) at $18.21

WARNING: The consideration of this stock can only be done with an understanding that we're in a bear market. Please carefully consider the downside risks mentioned in this research recommendation before taking any actions. Despite the qualitative nature of this company, the purchase of this stock should be considered speculative at this point in time.

As I mentioned in my sell recommendation of Helmerich and Payne (HP), I have been anticipating the opportunity to buy Meridian Biosciences (VIVO) for over 3 years now. According to Morningstar.com, VIVO, "...manufactures disposable immunodiagnostic test kits used for the rapid diagnosis of infectious diseases. Its products aid in the diagnosis of gastrointestinal infections, mononucleosis, ulcers, urinary-tract infections, respiratory infections, and strep throat."

As a Dividend Achiever, VIVO has increased its dividend every year for 16 years in a row according to MergentOnline. Yesterday March 25th, VIVO plumbed a new low after reaching a peak of $37 in April 2008. According to Dow's theory, VIVO has the following upside and downside targets:

Upside-

• $23.33
• $30.16
• $37.00

Downside-

• $11.29
• $ 5.65

Again, considerable attention must be directed at the prospect for the downside risk since we are in a bear market. Anyone buying this stock should be willing to accept that this company can easily go down to the $11.29 or $5.65 level or a loss of 38% and 69% respectively.

The fundamentals about this company are exceptional like little debt, double digit return on equity and return on assets and an astounding dividend growth rate. Your research of this stock might convince you to buy right away. However, the biggest red flag warning about this company is that the dividend payout ratio is very high at 91%. At some point this has to start going lower or the company may have to dip into it's cash reserves, borrow or cut the dividend altogether.

Aside from all the homework that you have to do before you consider this stock, I would like to draw your attention to the comparison chart below of VIVO's stock price to that of Google (GOOG). While these companies are in unrelated industries both GOOG and VIVO appeal to investors as demonstrated by the eerily similar stock price movement. From the IPO of GOOG back in August 19, 2004 to the most recent peak, GOOG and VIVO appreciated 639% and 665% respectively. However, when the downturn came GOOG fell hard and fast down 67% at the low while VIVO is down 56% from the high. The distinction, of course, is that VIVO will pay a portion of earnings to you the shareholder while it struggles through this economy and GOOG will only promise that things are going to get better as the shareholders hope that the price will go up.

I have bought shares of this company for the long term if the stock falls. While you're doing your research of this company, it is hoped that this stock continues to fall so that you can get a better price than mine. As with my purchase of HP, if VIVO miraculously increases in value, I will consider selling only if my gain has been exceptional and a better alternative presents itself at the same time. If you're unclear about my investment philosophy and approach please review my "About This Site" section. Touc.

SELL Helmerich and Payne (HP) at the Market

The time has finally come to issue a SELL recommendation for Helmerich and Payne (HP.) The stock has performed moderately since the research recommendation was issued on March 10, 2009. It is highly recommended that anyone who bought the stock based on my research should re-read the posting. From the current level of $26.13, HP is poised to reach the $30 level with no effort. However, the returns that this stock has provided in the last 16 days say that it is worthwhile considering alternatives. Later today I will present an alternative Dividend Achiever that I have personally been anticipating for over 3 years.

HP was recommended when it was trading at $22.55. As of Thursday March 26th, HP was quoted at $26.13. This equals a return of 15.88%. Conservatively, on an annualized basis this would equal approximately 380% return. Selling this stock now also generates a return 17.6 times the amount of the dividend yield if the stock was held for a whole year.

It is always recommended that when selling a stock, one should not place an order after hours or when the market is closed. This leaves the seller in the position of being vulnerable to the whims of the market makers. Instead, place your sell orders only as a market order during market hours. Some would complain that a market order during market hours might leave some profits on the table. However, I would rather leave some money on the table rather than have it taken away from me by the trades that are placed by institutions and market makers. Touc.

Diversification Doesn't Matter

The idea of a diversified holding of stocks is often said to save many investors from losing large amounts of money. However, the concept of diversification often is misunderstood in its most basic context. Diversification only matters when an investor is spread among completely different asset classes such as real estate (real property and not in the form of primary residence), business ownership, gold and silver (bullion), and stocks. All other notions of diversification are often just that…notions.

For do-it-yourself investors who wish to buy stocks, the mantra has been to diversify your risk. I guess this means, the more stocks you hold the less you’ll lose. Along these lines, diversification is supposed to reduce downside movements while participating in upside action. The fewer stocks you have the more you’ll lose. The more stocks you have the less you’ll lose. Unfortunately real life suggests that the more stocks a person holds the greater the risk of loss. How is this possible? I have my suspicions as to the reasons. However, I would like to provide the evidence for my claim that diversification isn’t all that its cracked up to be.

Many people who follow the stock market know that the Dow Jones Industrials Average is the most widely quoted index. However, most people “know” that the best index to follow for a broader understanding of how the entire stock market performed rely upon the Standard and Poor’s 500 (S&P 500) index. After all, the S&P 500 contains 500 diversified companies in many different industries. This is contrasted by the Dow Jones Industrials, which only contains 30 companies.

However, did you know that the top 43 companies in the S&P 500 comprise 50% of the movement of the index? The top 131 companies comprise 75% of the movement of the index. By the time you get to company number 258, you have reached 90% of the movement of the entire S&P 500 index. This means that the remaining 242 companies in the index only contribute 10% to the movement of the index. It’s as if those companies on the bottom half don’t even exist.

How is it possible that the S&P is so strongly influenced by the top 258 companies? The answer is that the S&P 500 is considered a market value weighted index. This means that, “…movements in price of companies whose total market valuation (share price times the number of outstanding shares) is larger will have a greater effect on the index than companies whose market valuation is smaller.” Basically, larger companies have more influence on the index. For this reason, most people who invest in an S&P 500 index fund or ETF are really investing in companies that have the largest valuation rather than a “well diversified” portfolio.

It wouldn’t be enough to simply say that the S&P 500 index isn’t as diversified as most people think. We need better evidence to show that the concept of diversification can’t stand on its own. Using the Morningstar.com database of various domestic indices, I compared the 1-year, 3-year, and 5-year performances to see if there are any distinguishing characteristics. Because this has been a declining market of the last 2 years we should see the indices with fewer stocks with the greatest losses. If there were any gains then the least diversified index should have the highest percentage gains.

Unfortunately, the reality is quite sobering. When comparing Morningstar’s 37 domestic indices in the 1-year category:

• Ranked #1 was the healthcare index with a –20.55% loss with 178 companies
• Dow 30 was ranked #17 with a loss of -35.05%
• Russell 2000 (2000 companies) was ranked #20 with a loss of -35.27%
• S&P 500 was ranked #23 with a loss of -36.47%

In the 3-year comparison:

• Ranked #1 was the energy index with a 11.92% gain with 121 companies
• Dow 30 was ranked #8 with a loss of -9.3%
• S&P 500 was ranked #21 with a loss of -12.31%
• Russell 2000 was ranked #29 with a loss of -15.44%

In the 5-year comparison:

• Ranked #1 was the energy index with a 11.92% gain with 121 companies
• Dow 30 was ranked #14 with a loss of -2.66%
• S&P 500 was ranked #23 with a loss of -3.61%
• Russell 2000 was ranked #27 with a loss of –3.78%

It seems as if the more diversified the index, the worse it performed. The only time the Dow 30 came at the bottom of the list was when we compared the 1-week, YTD, 4-week and 13-week ranges. Remember, a truly diversified index is supposed to overperform other indices on the downside (go down less) and underperform on the upside (go up less). If you’re investing for the “long haul” then the data tells us that you shouldn’t be invested in the S&P 500 or any other index that is “truly diversified.”

Another way to test this assumption of diversification on your own is to eyeball the different periods of time using the interactive comparison chart at Yahoo!Finance.com. First, pick the S&P 500 or any other “diversified” index and compare it to the Dow Jones Industrial Average. Then select the timeframe that you’d like to compare (5 years or more is best). Once the timeframe has been selected you can slide the timeframe backwards to any period you want. You’ll see that the Dow frequently overperforms on the upside and overperforms on the downside from 1980 onward. Prior to 1980, The Dow and S&P go back and forth in either underperforming or overperforming. The point being, diversification really doesn’t matter when it comes to spreading your risk. Touc.

Sources:

• IndexArb. Index Component Weights of Stocks in the S&P 500. accessed online March 24, 2009.
• EDinformatics. Investor Education: S&P 500 Index. Accessed online March 24, 2009.

Fannie and Freddie Break the Buck

Both Fannie and Freddie finally made it to the big leagues. What is it that both of these companies have managed to do? They both have closed above the fabled $1 a share mark. as I mentioned in my February 21st article the threat of delisting was upon the companies and that something had to happen. Either the companies get delisted or the miraculously go above $1.

Regular reader Ron wondered aloud whether or not some sort of trickery would the explanation for the continued propping of these otherwise dead companies. As I said in my comments following in the article, this is "one of the biggest speculations in history." No sooner said than done, the stocks fell promptly by 40% and bottomed on March 6th. From that ridiculously low level the stocks rose at least 185%.

We finally got the answer that I suspected but only time could tell. The government, lacking the barest sense of fiscal responsibility, has triumphed again. It is well worth watching Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac for a sense of what is to come next. I find it interesting that both companies bottomed on March 6th while the Industrials and Transports bottomed on March 9th. Maybe, just maybe, these government entities are on the inside track. I'll be following them as you could imagine. Touc.

The Common Refrain, To Our Detriment

The problem with our markets and economy, as a "capitalistic" society, boils down to the fact that every mechanism set up to avoid failure and disruption (counter to a capitalistic system) has failed. Not only has failure remained in the system, the very features that have been instituted to save us have actually contributed to a slow and methodical breakdown of a system that is supposed to thrive on change. The following is a short list of ideas, institutions or laws previously thought to bring stability to our financial system:

• 
  
  Fannie Mae
• 
  
  Freddie Mac
• 
  
  Circuits breakers
• 
  
  Federal Deposit Insurance Commission
• 
  
  Government seizure of AIG
• 
  
  National Association of Securities Dealers
• 
  
  FINRA
• 
  
  Securities and Exchange Commission
• 
  
  Generally Accepted Accounting Principles
• 
  
  Uptick Rule
• 
  
  Ban on Short Selling
• 
  
  Sarbanes-Oxley (Sarbox)

After all, look at some of these concepts and see what their impact has been. Circuit breaks were instituted after the stock market crash of 1987 to prevent a similar one-day decline of 20%. Since then the only circuit breakers to ever kick in are those that happened during the largest rise in stock market history from 1990 to 2007. On the way down however there is not a peep of a circuit breaker being tripped. The most recent orderly declines have contributed to the largest singular decline in stock market history. Worse still, we don't even know if the carnage is over.

How about the Securities Exchange Commission and FINRA? Out of all the crimes that have been committed on Wall Street the only person to go to jail was Bernard Madoff and his associates. Come on!!! The guy turned himself in...and if it wasn't for the market decline who knows how long the scheme could have gone on. Do you want financial security? Don't rely on the SEC or FINRA to provide it.

As quiet as its kept, one law that keeps being violated but hasn't landed anyone in jail is Sarbanes-Oxley (Sarbox). What is Sarbox? Oh, that's the law that came out after the Enron and WorldCom accounting and executive frauds of the 1990's. One provision of Sarbox says that executives can't publicly say that their company is financially safe and sound when they knew otherwise. This was a tactic that Enron executives used to prop their price up while they were selling at the same time. I have heard too many executive from Fannie, Freddie, Lehman, Merrill, B of A, Citi and others do what is a clear violation of the letter and intent of the law. Any of those guys in jail yet? Naw, no one is likely to go to jail for outright lying because if the executive says something to prop the company stock between the quarterly reports but not specifically on the audited quarterly report itself then it's cool. The Sarbox legislation reads like a "how to guide" on ways to avoid getting caught. Either let Skilling and Ebbers go or back the intent of the law and put the most recent offenders in jail.

After the Enron and WorldCom debacle Sarbox was supposed to address the issue of off-balance sheet items. Among other things Sarbox says that it's purpose is:

"...to identify areas of reporting that are most susceptible to fraud, inappropriate manipulation, or inappropriate earnings management, such as revenue recognition and the accounting treatment of off-balance sheet special purpose entities." (emphasis mine)

What about Fannie, Freddie, Citi, and Merrill using off balance sheet entities or GE using earnings management to cover their losses or produce profits? Is anyone going to stand tall and call these Enronesque tactics out?· Not likely, whoever has the guts to bringing these issues up would be accused of kicking an opponent while they're down. Unsportsman like conduct would be the charge.

Alright, so what's my beef with FDIC? It sounds like a wholesome institution. After all, it protects the deposits of everyday citizens like you and me, right? Thanks to James Grant's book Mr. Market Miscalculates, here is what National City Bank (today's Citigroup) had to say about the legislation bringing FDIC into being:

"The element of character in the choice of bank is eliminated, and the competitive appeal is shifted to other and lower standards, such as liberality in making loans. The natural result is that the standards of management are lowered, bankers may take greater risks for the sake of larger profits and the economic loss which accompanies bad bank management increases."

Now, don't get me wrong, I like keeping my money in an institution that passes on the cost of deposit insurance. However, it is the FDIC protection that allows the banking institutions to run amok when times are good and the public has to pay when times aren’t so exciting. Is there any coincidence that we had the S&L crisis (FSLIC backed) to begin with? Is it any wonder that the costs associated with the S&L crisis are still part of our government's off-budget items. At the same time we're still paying for the S&L debts, the Resolution Trust Corporation (RTC) is called a success. Prophetically, Citigroup is among the largest offenders of the very system that their forerunner was against and for the very same reasons. There is little wonder the FDIC is petitioning congress for an additional $500 billion backstop "just in case." The FDIC is moral hazard reincarnated. After all, a bank can put a FDIC sticker on their door and have instant credibility as a business and if it fails the FDIC swoops in to legitimize the sticker.

The government seizure of AIG is now a hornets nest. But it never had to be. If we didn't bail out AIG we wouldn't have to worry about bonuses being paid in the first place. The near $10 trillion of bailout money could have gone to better uses like bailing out the FDIC, something that people have expected to be there for over 60 years. Or buying up 90% of all mortgages in the nation...no, no... better still, insuring against any defaulted mortgages up to $10 trillion. By insuring against loss, no money has to go out at all until there is a real, honest to goodness foreclosure. And like every good insurance company, the government could selectively decide to pay up.

The outlandishness of getting rid of these organizations certainly gets folks riled up. How could a simple two-year decline in the stock market and economy call for the dissolution to such important entities? To which I say, show me the evidence that these rules and organizations have done their job. What good comes from letting a company like AIG stay around when so many well run insurance companies are waiting to take their place. Ah, but the common refrain is, "if we let AIG go then the alternative could be worse." Touc.

Sources:

• 
  
  Department of Justice. “Former Enron chairman and chief executive officer Kenneth L. Lay charged with conspiracy, fraud, false statements.” July, 8, 2002. accessed online March 22, 2009.
• 
  
  Colvin, Geoffrey and Benner, Kathy. “GE Under Siege.” Fortune Magazine. October 15, 2008. accessed online March 22, 2009.
• 
  
  Grant, James. Mr. Market Miscalculates. Axios Press. 2008. page 202.
• 
  
  DioGuardi, Joseph. “Enron Fraud Small Change Next to U.S. Accounting Gimmicks.” World Tribune.com. May 4, 2003. accessed online March 22, 2009.

Book Review: Trouncing the Dow

The results are in on my 8-year survey of the investment method that is in the book Trouncing the Dow by Kenneth Lee. As with most investment books, there is the promise of rich rewards if you follow the author's secret to investment success. The only problem is that in order to really know if an approach is useful you need to see how the process would work over an extended period of time. Upon buying any investment book, it is impossible to find meaning in what the book contains. After years of passive study Trouncing the Dow proves to be a book that is worth examining.

Naturally, this book drew my attention because of its focus on the Dow Jones Industrial Average. By choosing stocks that are in the Dow Industrial average, Lee is trying to convey the idea that quality should be a priority when deciding which stocks to buy. However, the strength of this investment approach is found in the author's ability to recognize that stocks cannot and should not be held for the "long run." Instead, Lee says that, after determining the price range for a particular stock, you would consider buying at the low and selling at the high end of the range.

In theory an investment approach either works or doesn't. However, there is the real world to bear upon the actual outcome of any investment style. In the case of Trouncing the Dow, I have the benefit of starting my analysis in the middle of major bull market correction in May of 2001. This starting point takes away the illusion that all stock will go up forever as demonstrated by the Dow Industrials falling 37% and the NASDAQ falling 70% during the period from January 2000 to September 2002.

This review was done as a real-time experiment rather than an investigation based on looking back (backtesting) on what the performance would have been. From May to December 2001, I started my investigation of the benchmark investing method using 19 companies that were on my list for possible investments. As mentioned earlier, the benchmark method indicates what the range of a stock price should be in order to buy or sell. Trouncing the Dow uses Value Line Investment Survey as the sole source for deriving the data necessary to come to a conclusion.

Because there is no such thing as a perfect approach to investing, I consider a successful approach one that gets me close to the high and the low price but above the range on the downside and below the range on the upside. If a stock was predicted to reach a high of $45 but peaked at $40 then there is no value in that prediction since I would have been waiting for a price that never materialized. Conversely, if the prediction was that the stock was supposed to reach a low of $10 but only went as low as $12 then I would have never considered buying the stock until it reached $10 therefore this would have been considered a false or inaccurate prediction. Some stocks that had a predicted low of $10 but actually hit bottom at $8 were considered accurate and an acceptable trade-off given the fact that the selected stock paid a dividend compensating for the wait on the way down and up. In general my findings about this investing approach are as follows:

First, the accurate observations (11/19):

• The average decline after the predicted low was 22%
• The largest decline after the predicted low was 47%
• The smallest decline after the predicted low was 12%
• All 11 stocks exceeded the predicted high price, in some cased by 3 times
• Prior to 2001, 9 of 11 stocks had a history of increasing the dividend every year for the last 10 years

The inaccurate predictions (8/19):

• 1 company filed bankruptcy
• 1 company was bought
• Prior to 2001, 2 0f 8 stocks had a history of increased dividends
• Benchmarking was way off the mark when predicting transportation companies
  
  

In a proposition that is 50/50 in terms of the outcome, Trouncing the Dow method seems to be an effective way to increase the odds in your favor. Again, I only considered the benchmark approach to be effective if the stock price went below the predicted low. Why? Because we're only interested in what the worst case scenario is or might be. The upside will always take care of itself.

Combining the benchmark method, in Trouncing the Dow, with the non-banking companies in the Dividend Achievers Index may be an effective way to increase the quality of the stocks you choose to buy as well as when you decide to buy the stocks. I recommend that you at least check the book out at your local library and apply the approach to the non-financial components of the Dow Jones Industrial Average. Keyword search the title of the book and you'll find plenty of backtested analysis for this investing approach all over the internet. Touc.

Financial Panic Chronicles

After the most recent banking drama that we've been having, I thought it would be interesting for us to turn back the clock and revisit a bygone era of prior financial panics. This will be the beginning of a series of posts from various news sources. The purpose of this exercise is to see, that despite the passage of time, how we make some fundamental mistakes over and over again.

The first financial panic that I'm examining is the failure of Bodenkreditanstalt which later became CreditAnstalt. The following excerpt is from the New York Times dated November 15, 1929:

"The president of the bank employes' association demanded that the fortune of $7,000,000 which Herr Sieghart is alleged to have obtained, despite the collapse of the bank be confiscated for partial reparation of the losses of employes and shareholders in accordance with the bank's articles of incorporation."

Wow, leaving aside the way they spelled 'employee' back in 1929, you'd think this was straight from an article on the bonuses being doled out by AIG. By the way, $7 million in 1929 is the equivalent of $84 million in 2007. The more things change the more they stay the same. Touc.

Source:

• "Austria Bank Head Scored In Failure." New York Times. November 15, 1929.

Industrial Production Index Fence Sitting

The news just keeps coming in. Today the Federal Reserve announced the Industrial Production Index (IPI) figures for the month of February. The IPI fell to the level of 99.7298. This is 1.93% above the December 2001 level of 97.8399. Falling below the Dec. 2001 level would bring economic activity to the dark ages for all intents and purposes.

Warning: the following charts may cause severe and/or permanent eye damage. Avert your eyes if you start to feel the signs of fatigue, drowsiness, or nausea.This blog is being featured on www.condron.us, I hope you find this useful.

For all I know this is do or die for the U.S. economy. Because the IPI is a lagging indicator as part of Dow's Theory, we can only guess that as the Dow Industrials and Dow Transports have bottomed on March 9th we might be in the midst of a temporary bottom. How do I know? I don't know. However, the economic data that is coming out recently isn't worse than what would be expected as the "experts" have baked in much of what is known to be on the horizon.

My opinion is that we aren't out of the woods but we are well on our way to a natural reaction to the oversold conditions in the market and the economy. However, be prepared for new and unforeseen realities that the market has to offer. As an example, what would happen if a medium sized holder of treasuries decides to sell all of their holdings? The shock to the financial system would be profound and unexpected since everyone is waiting on pins and needles for China or Japan to pull the trigger.

Usually it is the unexpected and smaller players that can disrupt an entire system like what occurred in Thailand in 1997 or Austria in 1931. As the prevailing logic goes, China and Japan have too much at stake to actually sell their U.S. treasuries, therefore it is fitting that they wouldn't engage in the activity as readily as, say, ______________________(fill in the blank).

As with every snowball, all it takes is a small player to get things started. The rest becomes a matter of flooding the exits. The last thing we need in this economy is rising interest rates due to the forced selling of treasuries. This would be the final blow to the perception that the economic "crisis" can be contained. However, it is this scenario that has the highest probability of occurring as a sort of "black swan" event. Touc.

Uptick Rule and Short Selling Ban

Many market commentators and participants have extolled the virtues of the uptick rule for short selling of stocks. Nothing bores me more than someone who blithely suggests something that actually has little or no impact in today's stock market. My goal is to hammer down the notion that re-instituting the uptick rule will somehow avoid "bear raids" or short sellers taking advantage of a stock that is already in a declining trend. I will also demonstrate the impact of the elimination of short selling on Taiwan stock exchange and compare its performance with that of the Dow Industrials during the same time frame.

Insight on the Uptick Rule

As a person who started my investing career as a short seller, I can say that the uptick rule was a saving grace for me. According to Investopedia.com, the uptick rule is:

A former rule established by the SEC that requires that every short sale transaction be entered at a price that is higher than the price of the previous trade. This rule was introduced in the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 as Rule 10a-1 and was implemented in 1938. The uptick rule prevents short sellers from adding to the downward momentum when the price of an asset is already experiencing sharp declines.

What this meant for me is that I could get the benefit of the stock price rising before my order to sell short was executed by my broker. As a short seller this is exactly what you want as a means of avoiding the common mistake of selling low and buying high.

As the current bear market had gathered its most steam, critics have been saying that the lack of an uptick rule is responsible for the markets free fall decline from October 2007 until the most recent low of March 9th. What these critics fail to recognized is that with stock prices being traded in pennies rather than eighths it almost doesn't matter whether there is an uptick rule or not.

When stocks were traded in eighths a short seller could gain $0.125 on every uptick. Assuming that the stock was going to fall anyway, that actually increases the profitability of the trade. If, on the other hand, the stock trades up by a penny, and then falls, the uptick rule really does more harm than good, for the short seller that is.

Imagine the harm that the uptick rule does to short sellers. With stocks trading on a penny basis, if a stock is in a free fall there is no telling when the stock's price will turn resolutely to the upside. This essentially puts the power in the hands of the big institutional traders to manipulate the market. Notice that when Jim Cramer describes manipulating a stock's price, he mentions doing the manipulation in the options market and not with the actual shares. Cramer only uses the actual shares after pushing up or pushing down the stock price in the futures market. Clearly, this is where the regulation is needed, not with the short selling of actual shares. If, as a short seller, I'm discouraged about participating in the markets because the rules are stacked against me then I will stay away. Surprisingly, this is actually harmful for the markets as will be demonstrated in my second piece about the Taiwan stock exchange's ban on short sellers.

With the uptick rule and stocks trading in eighths, as a short seller, at least you get the protection of seeing the price move "significantly" higher before continuing to go lower. At which point the short seller could more accurately decide if they want to hold on to the position. Without the uptick rule the short seller gets no real-time "heads up" as to a possible reversal of the trend as the trade is being placed. This is how money is lost in short selling without an uptick rule. This may also explain why so many people lose money buying stocks without a "down tick" rule. If only I could place an order to buy and it would only be executed after the stock price traded down...I would be so happy.

Short Selling Ban

Finally, I'd like to revisit the idea of whether short selling drives down the stock market. As I mentioned in my November 22, 2008 article, banning short selling would have no impact on the decline of stocks. As my only way to demonstrate this fact I compared the performance of the Taiwan's TSEC Weighted Index to the Dow Jones Industrial Average.

Starting on October 1, 2008 the regulator for the TSEC banned all forms of short selling in an effort to stop the decline in the stocks. On November 28, 2008 the ban on short selling was lifted with orders for short sales only allowed based on the end of day closing price. In the chart below, Oct. 1, 2008 to Nov. 28, 2008, I have compared the performance of the TSEC and the Dow Jones Industrial Average to see if there was any material difference between the two indices. As expected, there was no difference in the amount of the decline in either index. Furthermore, when the global stock markets started going higher on November 20th the TSEC index lagged the performance of the Dow by nearly 5%.

The following is a critical observation, both indices experienced equal declines but unequal increases. Had short sellers been pressured to buy back stocks at the November 20 low the Taiwanese index would have likely had an equal or better increase than the Dow Industrials. Based on this evidence we should be moving away from the regulatory effort to take away this critically important feature to a liquid and healthy financial market.

Learn more about short selling by reading Bear Markets by Harry Schultz. Touc.

Sources:

• "Taiwan to Partially Resume Short Selling of Stocks Today." AsiaPulse News. Nov 28, 2008.
• "Uptick Rule." Investopedia. Accessed March 15, 2009.

Research Rec.: Helmerich & Payne (HP) at $22.55

Today I bought the oil driller Helmerich and Payne (HP) at the price of $22.58. If you remember, I recommended this stock on September 29, 2006 at the price of $23.03. After the recommendation, I issued a sell recommendation of the stock on August 12, 2008 when the stock was selling around $53.95. I missed calling a sell recommendation at or near the top when the stock was selling for $77.24 in June of 2008.

Keep in mind that my current purchase is strictly speculation due to the fact that we're still in a severe bear market. This means that when, and if, the market and economy continue to go lower, the demand for oil and its price will go down further. However, according to Dow's theory the following upside targets for HP's stock price are:

• $37.08
• $47.12 (50% principal)
• $57.15
• $77.24

We can expect that a bear market rally would bring the stock price at least to the $37.08 level. However, we should never forget the downside risks this stock is likely to face. My expectations of the downside are based on the earnings falling by 50% which would not impact the dividend at all. A decline of earnings should bring a decline in the price of the stock. It is safest for us to assume that the price would fall at least half of the most recent low of $17.01. If you're willing to accept a decline of 62% then this is a great speculation (as opposed to investment) in a quality dividend paying stock. According to MergentOnline, HP has increased the dividend for 31 years in a row.

Some would argue that I should highlight the relevance of peak oil, future inflation due to the government stimulus, increased aggregate demand, and other assorted factors that affect oil. While these matters are important the reality is that the markets rule the day. What I do know about inflation is based on the chart below. I pulled from BigCharts.com the price movement of Helmerich and Payne (HP), Coure D'Alene (CDE), Agnico-Eagle (AEM) and the Dow Jones Industrial Average from the period of 1973 to 1983.

Notice how HP was able to beat out the traditional favorites during inflation like Agnico-Eagle, a gold mining company. Also notice how HP hammered the best precious metal bet on inflation, silver, as represented by CDE. As expected the Dow Jones Industrial Average was a none factor as an investment but was used as a point of reference. If we're headed towards massive levels of inflation, after the wipe out of assets in the current deflation, then HP might be the best of the best when that time comes. Touc.

Various Notes on the Market

The Utility Average

Today the Dow Jones Utility Average had wicked downside action to the tune of 3.18%. It is said that the DJ Utility Average leads the market due to its more sophisticated investors seeking safety and income. This is especially reflected in the October 10, 2008 bottom that was reached in the index which was well ahead of the November 20, 2008 bottom experienced in the general stock market.

Today's action was significant because the Utility Average fell below the closing low of October 10, 2008. If this is any indication, with any follow through in the coming weeks, then we've got lots more to go on the downside.

Market Forecast

On November 21, 2008 I said:

Another factor that is of concern for this market is that the Dow Industrials broke through its 4% yield to finish Thursday November 20th at a yield of 4.12%. We can only guess that the Dow is headed to a yield of 5% or a closing price of 6226.

It looks increasingly like we're going to reach that 5% dividend yield on the Dow Jones Industrial Average. Currently, we're within 500 points of reaching the 5% yield on the index. The only problem is that the yield will have to go back down (4.99% to 4.01%) as the dividend cuts in the index take place. This would result in a lower price on the Dow in order to achieve the same dividend yield.

Bailout Watchlist

If you've been reading this blog for any amount of time you know that the current bailout of the financial system has failed miserably. Over $8.5 trillion has been distributed to various institutions with little or no impact. As the Dow Jones Industrial Average reaches new lows, I want to point out the other bailouts that have passed into history but are not being counted as failures as they should be since they only provided temporary reprieves that would ultimately come back to haunt us in bigger and broader reaching fashion. So far, our stock market, as indicated by the Dow Jones Industrial Average, has managed to fall back to 1996 levels. This means that the following bailouts have been a waste of "market stabilizing" money:

• Airlines (2001) $3.171 billion
• Brazil (1998) $30 billion
• Long Term Capital Management (1998) $3.5 billion
• Thailand, S. Korea, Russia, Indonesia (1998) $141 billion

As we go back in time, I'll add more " market stabilizing" bailout to the tally. Next up is the Mexican Peso bailout of 1994. Unfortunately, we'd have to fall to the high 3000 level in order for that to occur. Please feel free to add to the list of items that were supposed to support or stabilize the markets but so far have been wiped out. Touc.

Delisting of GSEs Looms Large

The day of reckoning is coming for both Fannie Mae (FNM) and Freddie Mac (FRE). The first time delisting of these companies was discussed, on September 8, 2008, the NYSE notified FNM and FRE that they'd have to increase their share price over a dollar or the stocks would be delisted from the exchange after six months. The two previous times that the stocks fell below $1 the government was able to bring them back above the minimum.

While being delisted isn't the end of the world for most companies, these government entities rely on the confidence of the markets to move forward after being seized. If the government has plans for the structured reorganization of mortgages in conjunction with the latest bailout package then being delisted would be a final nail in the failed bailout coffin.

Look for a boosting of the share price to ridiculous levels (anything above $1) or go literally to zero in the next delisting notification process. I believe that the prospect of delisting is going to wipe out these companies and possibly the banking system. Touc.

Sources:

Spicer, Jonathan. "Fannie, Freddie Facing Delisting Threat." Thomas Reuters. September 8, 2008. Accessed February 21, 2009.

When Paper has no Value

The time will come when governments of the world realize, by force in some cases, that more value and confidence can be gained from using gold as the last resort bailout mechanism rather than paper or digital money. However, the gold option is very much the financial equivalent of the nuclear option. No nation wants to actually resort to this feature first because as one nation dips its toes in the water all subsequent nations will follow in its path at ever higher gold prices. It is only the last nation in the pool, with sizable gold reserves, that benefits the most from using gold as collateral. The first nation in the pool becomes the sacrificial lamb. Unfortunately, desperate times call for desperate measures.

As an example, in 1974 the official rate of gold was at $42.22 an ounce. However, the free market price of gold reached $180 an ounce. The free market price of gold increased the borrowing power of bankrupt Italy, which had 2,500 tonnes of gold, from $3.7 billion to $15.8 billion. On September 1 1974, West Germany lent Italy enough money to stave off complete collapse of the nation using the free market price of their gold holdings as collateral. Most interesting in this deal is that West Germany never collected on the gold. It was accepted on faith that if the loan could not be repaid then the gold would be shipped to West Germany. However, as long as Italy was able to make their payments on the loan then there would be no question of whether or not they would ship the gold in the event of default. This gave every incentive for both West Germany and Italy to hope for the rise in the price of gold.

We often hear about how governments would rather not have gold compete with their currency or that gold has no master. Then why are central banks filled with the stuff? The case of Italy in 1974 provides a perfect example of the reason why.

Gold acts as the last resort to combat the global competitive protectionist policies of coordinated rate reductions and domestic stimulus packages that we're seeing today. When a nation is on the brink and there is talk if a loan agreement based on the value of gold then, and only then, can we be assured of the turn in the tide for inflation, interest rates, stocks and the price of gold. Touc.

Sources:

• Lee, John. "German-Italian Deal ignores U.S. Policy." New York Times. Sept. 2, 1974. p.21.
• Hofmann, Paul. "Bonn to give Rome A $2 Billion Loan in Financial Crisis." New York Times. Sept. 1, 1974. p.1.
• Russell, Richard. Dow Theory Letters. June 26, 1974. Letter 601. p. 4.

Volume Observations in Bear Markets

The charts below reflect the peak in the Dow Jones Industrial Average from the week of October 8, 2007 (yellow) and February 7, 1966 (green). We're 72 weeks into the current bear market and all systems are go.

Notice that volume is generally rising in both instances. This indicates that we're still in the early stages of this bear market. This bear market will indicate that it is near the end by having a flat or declining trend in overall volume. Unlike the bear market of 1966, which began rising in the 35th week, the current bear market hasn't seen a sustained rally.

The overall trend in volume is quite fascinating. In both bear markets there is an early above trend volume pattern however, in week 17 and week 12 there is a spike down. There is also a surge in week 47 and week 48 from below trend volume to above trend volume.

All this means that while we may be at the bottom cyclically we're still in a secular bear market. Touc.

Misinformed Market Observations

The information that is being provided on the website dShort.com is top notch. So good is the information on this website that it should be the beginning course for every investor. However, there is a disservice being done by those who take this information but don’t put it in its proper context. The information that I’m referring to regards a Bull and Bear Market Rally Chart that depicts the performance of the Dow Industrials, S&P, and the Nasdaq indices during major declines in history compared to the most recent decline. The reaction to this chart, if you’re a stock market bull is a glazed over, panic-stricken stare. If you’re a stock market bear you’re probably salivating with eager anticipation and excitement.

The problem with this chart is that it is being used by “bears” as a cautionary tale of what is to come (i.e. 1929 to 1932-type decline). However, these indices, while similar (they're all traded in the U.S), are not the same and should not be compared to each other, especially when we have data on the Dow all the way back to 1896.

More important than what is shown is what it doesn’t show. The chart doesn’t show the periods in history when the Dow declined by 40% or more in one move as has occurred since October 2007. In every instance that the Dow has fallen 40% or more in one fell swoop, as it has recently, the market rebounded 50% to 100% every time.

• Jan 19, 1906 to Nov. 15, 1907 decline of 48.3%
• Nov. 15, 1907 to Nov. 19, 1909 increase of 89%
• Sept. 30, 1912 to Dec. 24, 1914 decline of 43%
• Dec. 24, 1914 to Nov. 21, 1916 increase of 107%
• Nov. 21, 1916 to Dec. 19, 1917 decline of 40%
• Dec. 19, 1917 to Nov. 03, 1919 increase of 81%
• Nov. 3, 1919 to Aug. 24, 1921 decline of 46%
• Aug. 24, 1921 to Oct. 14, 1922 increase of 61%

All of these declines and increases occurred within the bear market of 1906 to 1924. This was a period when the Dow started 1906 at 100 and didn't close permanently above 100 until after July 1924. While I understand the dire nature of the markets and the financial system a sucker's rally has to start soon. Every 17-25 year period of bear markets has had similar action and reaction. This means that either we're going to get a sucker's rally or this is really the bottom in the market.

Some could accuse me of being selective but the facts and truth are consistent. 100% of declines in the Dow of 40% or more result in a reaction of 50% or more. If you can find a period that doesn’t meet this criteria then pass it along since I need all the information that I can get. By the way, if you want to school me on 1929-1932 then please read my breakdown of this market decline in my Big Picture Observation and 1929 article.

It is likely that "this time is different" and I'll be proven wrong. However, I feel that a little perspective is necessary on this topic. Touc.

Convergence of Extraordinary Forces

Most people contend the current economic malaise that we're experiencing has something to do with the housing sector of the economy. I believe this notion is an adept recognition of the symptom rather than an acknowledgment of the true problem.

My views is that the banks are the problem and have been since the beginning. After all, homes could not have been bought if the easy financing wasn't available. Furthermore, homes could not have been built if it were not for the financing provided to the homebuilders through the capital markets and the banks. This lead me to the conclusion that the ebb and flow of bank deposits would be an indication of the overall pulse of the economy and the stock market.

To this end I have conjured up the Demand Deposits at Commercial Banks provided by the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System. In the chart below the increase in the Demand Deposits indicated a general instability in the banking system. The decline in the Demand Deposits indicates a high level of confidence in the banking system. While these ideas seem useful there seems to be an attempt to show correlation as causation which can be just as dangerous as mistaking the symptom as the problem. We forge ahead regardless.



The chart above shows that since September 2006 there is a parabolic increase of demand deposits at banks. This reflects part of the "flight to safety" that many are describing in the financial press. Flight to safety occurs when savers realize that investments carry unforeseen amounts of risk. According to David Marantette, parabolic moves up or down can only last for so long. The exhaustion of such moves can be attributed to entropy or the second law of thermodynamics.

Entropy is the change of energy from an orderly state to a state of dissipation or death. The parabolic rise in the last two years will have to break down at some point. In the case of Demand Deposits, what we should expect to happen is for the index to dramatically decline in an equally violent fashion. A good example can be found in the low of December 2000 until the peak of September 2001. That parabolic move was followed by a violent decline in the index from October 2001 until September 2002. The September 2002 bottom was offset by a violent rise until August 2003. After the August 2003 peak we see an "orderly" diffusion of the energy expelled during the period from December 2000 until August 2003.

If the stock market is a leading indicator for the economy then it would appear that the Dow Jones Industrial Average anticipated the end of the volatility in the Demand Deposits by hitting bottom in October 2002. From October 2002 the Dow Jones Industrial Average increased from the level of 7286. 27 to the high of 14,164.53 in October of 2007, an increase of 94%.

Not only does entropy seem to be at work with the Demand Deposits, cycles seem to be playing a prominent role in the action of this index. Of the last cycle bottoms since 1959 the average cycle lasted about 5.6 years. Half of the cycle bottom, to find where the top would occur, is equal to 2.8 years. If projected from the September 2006 low, we would expect the most recent rise to peak around June of 2009. The next bottom in the index projected to take place around April 2012.

Finally, seeing this index nearly triple it's move beyond the normal peak from periods past leads me to think reversion to the mean. At the very least this index should fall to the level of the previous high. The current level is at 59% year-over-year percentage change while the previous peak was at 13.6%, a decline of 76%.

The impact of all this information is that starting in June 2009 the stock market will either hit bottom and go higher or trade in a wide range until April 2012. Afterwards the market would head lower in a fashion similar to what we've seen in the last 2 years. Touc.

Six or Half a Dozen?

As I have demonstrated in my October 2008 article and was later confirmed by BloombergMarkets magazine in their Jan. 2009 issue, the old administration (republicans) had doled out at least $8.5 trillion in support of the financial markets. Of this amount, only $700 billion was put before Congress for a vote which was rejected the first time (as it should have) then rejiggered and forced down our throats the second time.

Now, the minority party (republicans) in congress wants to stand opposed to the very thing that the old administration (republican) vehemently said was needed in order to save the economy. The current administration (democrats) is doing everything the old administration espoused (the opposite of change) by using fear tactics and is getting no love from the same republicans who supported the first bailout package back in October of 2008.

What really grinds my gears is the fact that $7.8 trillion never went up for a vote and now the republicans are saying that Obama's $900 billion is going to bankrupt this country. Where were the critics when the $7.8 trillion was going down the drain? Don't misunderstand me, I think that the only money that should have been provided was by the FDIC for bank failures. I knew the bailout was a scam when only $73 billion of the $8.5 trillion was used for FDIC insured instititions. Now there are no bullets left for the very things that were supposed to be government insured.

These politicians, both republican and democrat, are gaming the system and the citizenry. Why are we allowing this, because if we don't then, "the whole financial system would collapse." As I showed on October 2008, the $1.8 trillion that was spent didn't stop Wachovia, Lehman Brothers, AIG, Freddie Mac, Fannie Mae, IndyMac, Washington Mutual, Merrill Lynch, Bear Stearns and a whole host of other institutions from collapse. After the $1.8 trillion an additional $6.7 trillion was thrown into the fire to no avail. Historically, bailout don't work and now we're being gamed right and left.

Don't worry though, if the economy recovers within the Obama administration the three card monty operators, republicans and democrats, will claim that they are responsible for the outcome. All the while they will be bankrupting our country. Touc.

Bank of Hawaii Update

As a follow-up to my earlier research recommendation of Bank of Hawaii there is news that three days afterward, on January 15th, Bank Director magazine ranked Bank of Hawaii as number 4 among the nation's top 150 banks. Bank Director says that,

"Honolulu-based Bank of Hawaii, No. 4 on the Scorecard, has $10.4 billion in assets, making it the largest in asset size of the top five financial institutions. Its impressive 23.24% ROAE is the highest of any large bank or thrift during the four-quarter analysis period. 'They are a much more traditional bank with a good mix of commercial and retail customers,' says Aaron Deer, a San Francisco-based research analyst at Sandler O’Neill, who follows western banks. 'They’re well rounded and they’ve avoided a lot of the pitfalls that many other banks have stepped into.'”

It is nice to know that we might be looking in the right places when it comes to investment opportunities in the banking industry. So far, BOH is up by 3.79% in 26 calendar days. Good luck on your investment research of this quality bank. Touc.

Dow's Theory

Dow's theory is supposed to be the barometer of the market. In general the market doesn't care about one single statistic or policy implementation by the government. The market is the all encompassing knowledge of what the future will be. What does Dow's theory tell us about the prospects for the near term?

Dow's theory is telling us that the markets have hit bottom and are headed higher from here. However, this prognosis has one huge caveat. Only if the Dow Jones Industrial index continues to stay above the low that was reached on November 20, 2008 will the bear market rally remain in effect. Already the Transportation index has fallen below its Nov. 20th low as recently as Jan 20, 2009. Normally a re-confirmation of the bear market would have been signaled if both the Industrials and Transports fell below the Nov. 20 low. The fact that the Industrials hasn't confirmed the Transports by falling below the previous low and the rising volume since December 24th indicates that the markets are poised to move higher.



The risk to my outlook for the stock market is that both the Transports and Industrials fall below the lows of Nov. 20th at the same time. Falling below 7552.29, the Dow Industrials would have 4132.17 as its next resting point. This is not a wish on my part, it is only an observation as part of Dow's theory.

As an investor we need to approach this market with caution. As it stands, the news is very negative and there are more and more layoffs being reported. How are we supposed to commit our remaining investment funds (as opposed to savings) to the market after the painful experience of last year? Such a challenge is best answered by hedging your position by focusing on the strongest dividend paying companies that are out there. This way, if you're wrong about the stock going up at least you could hold and compound the dividends. Compounding only becomes necessary for those unwilling to sell after a certain amount of loss has been experienced. Take a look at my recent research recommendations on February 4th. These companies offer the best hedge against the prospect that the market could fall much lower.

Remember, the Industrials are either going back to 10836.11, a gain of 31%, which would still be within the context of a bear market or the Industrials are headed down to 4132.17 a loss of 50%. Touc.

When was it said?

"...the oil stocks are already the 'whipping boys' of the energy crisis, and Washington is playing the 'windfall profits' theme for all it's worth."

-Richard Russell. Dow Theory Letters. December 5, 1979.

The preceding comment was found in the Dow Theory Letters at or near the peak in oil prices. It seem that politician at the time were doing the same thing that they were doing during the congressional hearings with oil executives back in 2008.

The beauty of all this information is the fact that unlike other types of history, financial history does repeat itself. Of course there are minor difference in the names of the people but economic history points to the direction that things are headed. To me this means that the response by the government to the current economic malaise is only going to extend the pain rather than solve the problem. Touc.

Income Investing in Hard Times

According to the National Bureau of Economic Research, and backed up by the Federal Reserve Bank's Industrial Production Index, the economy officially went into recession starting in the month of December of 2007. Since then, we have seen the economy and the stock market decline in unprecedented amounts never before seen. As the chart below demonstrates, not even the "Great" Depression has seen such a year-over-year decline on a percentage basis.

When it comes to investing in the current economic environment we have to consider the worst case scenario. Below I have included a spreadsheet that considers Dividend Achievers that are close to or within 10% of the 1 year low. These stocks are ideal for consideration as your next research and potential purchase candidates.

What I have done is assume the period which these stocks have accrued the lowest quarterly earnings since the recession began then projected those low earnings to determine if the company can sustain the dividend payment over the coming months and years. Stocks that have a negative number in the column titled "cash remaining" are the least likely to be able to increase their dividend in the coming year. While this does not condemn the stock it does warns us of the danger that might exist. Also, stocks that are highlighted in red are those whose lowest quarterly earnings since 2006, if projected into the future, could not sustain the current dividend payout. These stocks (DBD, PII, KO, PPG, TRH, UVV) are still good companies however, if the recession continues or gets worse then we could see the dividend increase put on hold as well.

My recommendation is that stocks with the lowest payout ratio and the highest cash remaining (based on the lowest quarterly earnings since the recession began) are the best companies to start your research. Don't forget to verify the dividend history before buying these stocks. Touc.

SELL Altria (MO) at the Market

For the extremely conservative investor the time has come to issue a SELL recommendation for Altria (MO.) The stock has performed reasonably since the Research recommendation was issued on December 9, 2008. It is highly recommended that anyone who bought the stock based on my research should re-read the posting. The stock essentially went up from the date of recommendation. From the current level of $17, MO is poised to reach the $20 level with no effort. However, the returns that this stock has provided within the last two months say that it is worthwhile considering alternatives.

MO was recommended when it was trading at $14.99. As of Thursday January 29, 2008 MO was quoted at $17. This equals a return of 13.11% in less than 2 months. Conservatively, on an annualized basis this would equal approximately 78% return. Selling this stock now also generates a return 1 and a half times the amount of the dividend yield if the stock was held for a whole year.

For those that are willing to take the risk of holding on to this stock, MO announced 4th quarter earnings of $0.33 per share which implies annual earnings of $1.32. This equals just enough to pay the dividend of $1.28 with little room for a dividend increase in the coming year. At this point, it is difficult to say that the dividend is secure. However, the recent acquisition of UST, an earnings powerhouse in its own right, is likely to provide some life for MO earnings in the coming years.

It is always recommended that when selling a stock, one should not place an order after hours or when the market is closed. This leaves the seller in the position of being vulnerable to the whims of the market makers. Instead, place your sell orders only as a market order during market hours. Some would complain that a market order during market hours might leave some profits on the table. However, I would rather leave some money on the table rather than have it taken away from me by the trades that are placed by institutions and market makers. Touc.

Disclosure: I hold a 50% position in MO

Industrial Production Index

As expected the Industrial Production Index fell below the level of the September 2008 low of 105.2246. In addition, The IPI pierced the previous peak of June 2000 at 104.2873. Based on this most recent move the IPI is expected to decline at least to the December 2001 level of 97.8399. Thus far, the IPI has fallen 9 of the last 11 months.

What does all this mean? As far as I can tell, we're in for at least another six months of declines in the IPI. This does not mean that the stock market is fated to do the same. As an example, when the Dow Industrials hit bottom in December 1974 the IPI hit bottom in May 1975. We'll have to see if we're only as lucky as prior periods. Touc.

The Art and Science of Cycles

The chart below was pulled from the book Cycles, The Science of Prediction by Edward Dewey and Edwin Dakin. Just so you know, the book was published in 1947 and is surprisingly well written. What is important to gain from this chart is the fact that it accurately predicted the high for inflation in 1979 (blue circles) and the low for inflation in 2006 (red circles).

There are some who feel that the use of cycles in determining trends doesn't stand up to the academic rigor of a finely researched economic or financial treatise. There are others who might say that using cycles to determine the future is hocus-pocus-gooble-dee-gook. However, the fact remains, in 1947 Dewey and Dakin published their findings that predicted that wholesale prices (inflation) would be at its highest point around 1979 and its lowest point around 2006.

These predictions takes into account all human action and reaction to causes and consequences of the conditions at the respective periods. How is this possible? I don’t know, but I find it fascinating and useful since it provides perspective that is necessary under such “crisis” conditions. Touc.

$8.5 Trillion Spent and No Relief in Sight...

The combined effort of the Federal Reserve Bank and the U.S. Treasury hasn't done much towards solving the problems in our banking system. Since my last article about the Fed's action to bailout the financial system there has been an additional $6.684 trillion put to work assisting financial institutions. In the graphic below, from the February 2009 issue of Bloomberg Markets, is a visual of the allocation of all the funds that have been committed throughout the year 2008 until November 25.

Since my last article on the Fed's action in October 2008, the stock of Bank of America has fallen from $38.13 to the current level of $10.20. If the stock market is any indication of confidence in the banking system then Bank of America shareholders demonstrated their clear understanding of the extent of the problem.

Any reduction and/or elimination of bailouts will be the first sign of a recovery in the economy. However, with Bush/Obama asking for an additional $350 billion, the 2nd half of the $700 billion TARP program, from Congress means that we're in for another six months before we can start to look for clear indications of the true state of the economy. Touc.

Source:

• Mark Pittman and Bob Ivry. "How to Get to $8.5 Trillion." Bloomberg Markets. February 2009

Research Rec.: Bank of Hawaii (BOH) at $37.76

Today's research recommendation is Bank of Hawaii (BOH). BOH is described by MergentOnline as, "...the bank holding company for Bank of Hawaii (the Bank). The Bank provides financial services and products mainly in Hawaii and the Pacific Islands." MergentOnline also points out that BOH has increased its dividend every year for 30 consecutive years.

BOH is within 3.96% of the one year low and yields 4.80%. According to Value Line Investment Survey, BOH typically trades around 14 times earnings. At a 9.77 P/E ratio, either of two things need to occur:

• BOH earnings will have to come down
• BOH will have to revert back to selling at 14 time earnings

On January 5th, the investment bank Keefe, Bruyette and Woods (KBW) downgraded BOH because of expectations of lower earnings. KBW says that 2009 and 2010 earnings will be $2.60 for each year. This puts BOH's stock price at $36.40 if it were to trade at around 14 times earnings. Conversely, BOH would trade at $56.84 if it were to revert to the mean based on 2008 earnings of $4.06 (The Bank of Hawaii has estimated fourth quarter 2008 earnings of $0.89).

From the perspective of Dow's theory, BOH has three downside targets from the prior peak of $70 in September of 2008:

• $50.35
• $30.70
• $11.05

In the years from 1990 to 1997, BOH has retraced from the peak to between the 2nd and 3rd retracement levels according to Dow’s theory. If applied to the current price action this would bring BOH down to the level of $20.87. This would be the ideal buying point however we must be ready to pull the trigger anywhere between $30.70 and $20.87.

Considering that we're in a bear market it becomes necessary to decide how much an individual wants exposure to a bank in a deflationary environment. Assuming the worst, BOH could be viewed from the perspective of the "long-term" prospects based on the dividend. At the current dividend yield of 4.80%, BOH would double in approximately 15 years. This means that if you're of the buy-and-hold mindset then you would need to retain this stock for 15 years to recoup all that you have initially invested if you reinvest the dividends. This is a more accurate measure of the "long-term" in case you're wrong about the direction of the stock price. Additionally, BOH exhibits a 7 to 10-year cycle for price movement from trough to peak.

In the accompanying chart we can see that there have been two other major bottoms in the BOH’s stock price that were accompanied by a surge in trading volume. The current volume is giving similar indications as the 1990 and 2000 lows. All we need now is a good collapse in the price to reassure us of the opportunity to buy. That opportunity might come in the wake of BOH falling below the 52-week low of $36.32 reached on November 21, 2008.

BOH’s management has consistently rewarded shareholders for their patience and is likely to continue to do so. There are many ways to examine this company, however, be sure that you’re comfortable with investing in a bear market environment similar to 2008 before deciding to make your next purchase. Good luck in your research of this company. Touc.

Bear Market Rally Targets

The current rise in the stock market is moving along at a much healthier pace than was once seen from November 20, 2008 to December 15, 2008. We are now moving at a rate that will seem to trade in an uneventful range yet move incrementally higher.

As I stated in my post on December 10th, the market has three upside targets. Of the three targets for the Dow Jones Industrial Average, we have crossed the first, at 8943, with strong movement but weak volume. As of the close of market today, the Industrials are 609.90 points away from the next critical level on the index.

The Dow Jones Transportation Average has moved above the resistance level of 3692.57 by closing the day at 3717.26. This movement matched by the Industrials is proving constructive for the direction of the market.

The overall negatives for this stock market is the fact that volume hasn't been overwhelming. We need trading volume in the stock market to pick up in order to help confirm the trend. Also, the Industrial Production Index has fallen to 106.1173 in November from 106.7786 in October. While the Industrials and Transports are supposed to be leading indicators for the economy it would be nice to see the IPI move higher from the current levels but I wouldn't be surprised to see it move lower.