Bund, Tbond e la grossa coda gialla......(V.M. 77 anni)

[gipa69]

Una interessante analisi tecnica/statistica del mercato che va contro la mia posizione.....

By Rainsford Yang
Wednesday, March 21st 2007 11:00pm ET

Soon after today's FOMC announcement, at approximately 2:25pm ET, the NYSE advance/decline ratio hit 3:1 positive territory for the first time (see chart on our intraday snapshot page.) That bullish action triggered the intraday buy signal recently discussed in my March 19th column. From 2:25 ET until the close, the S&P500 rallied from 1423 to 1434, producing another solid profit for this intraday setup.

Over 250 issues made new 52-week highs during Tuesday's session and breadth was better than 4:1 positive. That's the third consecutive day we've seen advancing issues more than double decliners, a sign of broad-based strength. Clearly, the S&P is following the lead of the cumulative breadth line, which already closed in new highs for the year on Tuesday.

From an intermediate-term perspective, today's lopsided breadth statistics triggered another two-week buy setup due to the cluster of 3:1 positive breadth sessions (we consider it a cluster when two 3:1 sessions appear within a five-day time span.) This is identical to the signal triggered on March 8th, when we saw a similar cluster of positive breadth sessions. As I noted at the time, "It's generally a sign of strength when two such lopsided breadth sessions appear within close proximity, and the market has a notable tendency to close at a higher level two weeks later. Since 1984, we've seen this pattern triggered a total of 25 times, 20 of which led to a higher S&P ten trading days later."

Mark Hulbert at CBS MarketWatch points out that today's session triggered a rare bullish signal given the strong 90%+ upside volume on the NYSE. That's the second 90%+ up volume session this month, which triggers a three-month buy setup according to a study originally penned by Martin Zweig. I thought readers might be interested to know when (and how many) previous examples occurred, so we looked back through the last forty years of data to find all examples of two 90% up volume sessions within a three-month time span (parameters suggested by Zweig.) While we're in agreement with the bullish implications of the study, I'd note there have been very few examples since 1965. We found a total of six...

Two 90% Up Volume Days in Three Months
08/20/82... S&P500 +21.2% three months later
10/29/87... S&P500 +2.0% three months later
07/29/02... S&P500 -1.0% three months later
03/17/03... S&P500 +15.6% three months later
08/16/04... S&P500 +7.9% three months later
06/15/06... S&P500 +3.5% three months later
03/21/07... S&P500 ??? three months later

Today's 91% upside volume also brings to mind research posted at the last 90% up volume session in early March. At the time, we noted that such a lopsided volume session has often represented a short-term buying climax, meaning it's been rare to see the market pile on significant gains immediately following such lopsided buying pressure. Instead, the market generally enters into a choppy range or trades lower, particularly over the following session. In the last ten years, we've seen a total of twelve 90% up volume days, all of which are noted in the table below along with the S&P's performance the following session...

90% Up Volume Days on the NYSE
03/21/07... S&P500 ??? next session
03/06/07... S&P500 -0.2% next session
07/19/06... S&P500 -0.9% next session
06/29/06... S&P500 -0.2% next session
06/15/06... S&P500 -0.4% next session
04/18/06... S&P500 +0.2% next session
08/16/04... S&P500 +0.2% next session
06/07/04... S&P500 +0.1% next session
03/17/03... S&P500 +0.4% next session
01/02/03... S&P500 -0.1% next session
07/29/02... S&P500 +0.4% next session
07/05/02... S&P500 -1.2% next session
09/08/98... S&P500 -1.7% next session

While on the subject of advancing volume, I'd also note that today's 91% upside volume comes just two days after Monday's 84% up volume session. When two lopsided volume sessions occur within a three-day time span, it's generally a sign of heavy institutional buying pressure. And this type of buying power typically leads to further upside over the following week. Since 1980, there have been nineteen instances in which we've seen two 80%+ up volume days within a three-day time span. In fifteen cases the S&P was higher one week later, but more significantly there was only one instance in which the S&P was down more than 1% one week later. This implies limited downside potential heading into Wednesday of next week, with support likely to be found in the SPX 1420 area...

Two 80% Up Volume Days in Three Sessions
03/19/07 & 03/21/07... S&P500 ??? one week later
05/31/06 & 06/01/06... S&P500 -2.2% one week later (*)
11/03/04 & 11/04/04... S&P500 +1.0% one week later
08/18/04 & 08/20/04... S&P500 +0.9% one week later
08/16/04 & 08/18/04... S&P500 +0.9% one week later
03/25/04 & 03/29/04... S&P500 +2.5% one week later
04/17/03 & 04/22/03... S&P500 +0.7% one week later
03/13/03 & 03/17/03... S&P500 +0.2% one week later
01/02/03 & 01/06/03... S&P500 -0.3% one week later
10/11/02 & 10/15/02... S&P500 +1.0% one week later
10/10/02 & 10/11/02... S&P500 +5.9% one week later
03/04/02 & 03/06/02... S&P500 -0.8% one week later
10/29/87 & 10/30/87... S&P500 -0.6% one week later
01/02/87 & 01/05/87... S&P500 +3.2% one week later
08/02/84 & 08/03/84... S&P500 +1.9% one week later
08/01/84 & 08/02/84... S&P500 +4.8% one week later
10/07/82 & 10/11/82... S&P500 +1.7% one week later
10/06/82 & 10/07/82... S&P500 +4.5% one week later
08/23/82 & 08/25/82... S&P500 +0.6% one week later
08/20/82 & 08/23/82... S&P500 +1.4% one week later

 

[gipa69]

Near panic at the Fed
There is near panic at the Fed. You can see it in their statements even if you can't hear in their voices. It would have been fun to be in that FOMC room today with a recorder so we could hear the sound effects but instead we have to "hear between the lines".

RogerRafter on The Market Traders took a look at wording changes in the last two FOMC statements.

Here is the statement from the January 31, 2007 FOMC Meeting.
Here is the statement from the March 21, 2007 FOMC Meeting.

Old wording: "Recent indicators have suggested somewhat firmer economic growth, and some tentative signs of stabilization have appeared in the housing market. Overall, the economy seems likely to expand at a moderate pace over coming quarters."

New wording: "Recent indicators have been mixed and the adjustment in the housing sector is ongoing. Nevertheless, the economy seems likely to continue to expand at a moderate pace over coming quarters.


Old wording: "Readings on core inflation have improved modestly in recent months, and inflation pressures seem likely to moderate over time. However, the high level of resource utilization has the potential to sustain inflation pressures."

New wording: "Recent readings on core inflation have been somewhat elevated. Although inflation pressures seem likely to moderate over time, the high level of resource utilization has the potential to sustain those pressures."


Old wording: "The Committee judges that some inflation risks remain. The extent and timing of any additional firming that may be needed to address these risks will depend on the evolution of the outlook for both inflation and economic growth, as implied by incoming information."

New wording: "In these circumstances, the Committee's predominant policy concern remains the risk that inflation will fail to moderate as expected. Future policy adjustments will depend on the evolution of the outlook for both inflation and economic growth, as implied by incoming information."

Thanks Rodger.
The new statements show that Fed is supposedly more concerned about inflation and supposedly more concerned about high capacity utilization than in January. Previously they stated "some inflation risks remain", but their "predominant policy concern" now is that "inflation will fail to moderate".

With those concerns the Fed ought to be tightening, at least in theory. Instead the Fed completely dropped the phrase "The extent and timing of any additional firming that may be needed to address these risks will depend on the evolution of the outlook for both inflation and economic growth".

Dropping that phrase shows the Fed is far more concerned over a recession and an implosion in housing than any inflation they are harping about. A more honest wording would have been something like this.

FOMC Announcement Translation

We are unanimously scared half to death by the implosion in housing, defaults and foreclosures. Our biggest fear is a recession. A jobs slowdown would worsen that situation dramatically.

We are also somewhat concerned by rising food prices but those prices are soaring primarily because of Bush administration policy handouts to farmers and the ethanol industry. Economic policy can not really cure problems caused by poor administrative decisions. It would be a mistake to try.

Because of blatantly bad policy decisions by us, notably Greenspan's praise of subprime lenders, promotion of ARMs at the exact worst time for the consumer, support of toxic loans, and most importantly our previous decision to slash interest rates to 1%, we created the current property bubble. We now admit we did that on purpose. We just never expected the bubble to get this out of hand. We created the housing bubble on purpose to bail out banks that were at risk due to poor loans made to the dotcom industry. Now to bail out the housing industry we feel compelled move to a more neutral stance.

With consumer debt levels where they are, we are going to do everything in our power to keep asset prices high. If we could, we would even reinflate the housing bubble. But that gig is up unfortunately and with it any real hope for jobs expansion.

Now is not the time for a recession. We are in this fix because there is never a time for a recession. We hope to forestall recessions forever because if we can't all hell will break loose on the downside.

That Mish readers is what the Fed really said today. Nonetheless the market seemed to love it. But what's not to love? The simple written translation of the above text is "Party On Dudes".

In the UK they are now admitting to the "Party On Dudes" philosophy as noted by the The Independent headline Ex-Governor George says Bank deliberately fuelled consumer boom.

The Bank of England deliberately stoked the consumer boom that has led to record house prices and personal debt in order to avert a recession, the former Bank Governor Eddie George admitted yesterday.

Lord George said he and his colleagues on the Monetary Policy Committee "did not have much of a choice" as they battled to prevent the UK being dragged into a worldwide economic slump by slashing interest rates. And he said his legacy to the current MPC was to "sort out" the problems he had caused.

Lord George, who headed the Bank for a decade from 1993, revealed to MPs on the Treasury Select Committee that he knew the approach was not sustainable. "In the environment of global economic weakness at the beginning of this decade... external demand was declining and related to that, business investment was declining," he said. "We only had two alternative ways of sustaining demand and keeping the economy moving forward - one was public spending and the other was consumption.

"We knew that we were having to stimulate consumer spending. We knew we had pushed it up to levels which couldn't possibly be sustained into the medium and long term. But for the time being, if we had not done that, the UK economy would have gone into recession just as the United States did."
Heaven forbid! "A recession?" The lengths that central banks are going to avoid a recession are staggering. And each attempt to prevent said recession adds more and more and more to consumer debt. The hangover from this long running party is going to be the worst since the great depression. But who cares now? For now, the only discernible message from the Fed was "Party On Dudes". No one could hear the panic in their voices when they said it.

Mike Shedlock / Mish

 

[gipa69]

http://www.decisionpoint.com/TAC/ORD.html

 

[gipa69]

Altre misurazioni statistiche abbastanza positive....

We have now seen five days in the past month where the volume on the NYSE has been skewed either 9-to-1 on the upside or 9-to-1 on the downside. Some suggest that such volatility in breadth figures is bearish, but history strongly suggests otherwise - extreme changes in breadth over a short period of time have almost always preceded good rallies.

But let's take a look at these volume figures and see if the same thing applies. We'll look at any time since 1950 (the time my volume figures become reliable) where we got five of these 9-to-1 ratios (up or down) within a month's time like we have now.

Ten trading days later, the S&P 500 was higher 9 out of 11 times, though the average return was small at +0.2%. But by a month later, we still had 9 positive instances, and the average return climbed to +3.0%. That increased again to +4.6% by three months out, and after six months the S&P was positive all 11 times, with an average return of +9.4%. There were a couple of hairy short-term corrections in there, but again it proved to be a very good and consistent intermediate-term buy signal.

Ahh, you say, but this time it occurred after only a minor correction from a new high.

You may have a point there. The lowest close over the past month was only -5.9% below the last 52-week high, which isn't a particularly deep correction. The average correction in the 11 instances mentioned above was -15.5%, almost three times as large as our current one.

There were only two occurrences (1/11/51 and 4/5/51) that showed a correction of less than -10% before we got these volatile volume figures. A month after those instances, the S&P had returns of +4.8% and +3.4%, respectively.

So while we only had a couple of instances with shallow corrections, overall the correlation between the correction and future one-month returns was +0.4 (on a scale of -1 to +1). What that means is that the smaller the correction preceding these volume extremes, the higher the return going forward. We have a small sample size here, so I don't want to get too carried away with the stats, but it helps to answer the "Is this time different?" question.

OK, well, maybe the fact that the NYSE moved to decimalization in 2001 has affected this indicator, since it's easier for a stock to show a daily change now. That should make it more common to see extremes in breadth and would make the current situation less applicable to historical ones.

This is the tried-and-true argument we hear every time we get an extreme in breadth, so let's check it out.

During a calendar year, the average year since 1950 has seen six days where volume was skewed by a 9-to-1 ratio either to the upside or to the downside. Since the NYSE got rid of fractions, however, the years have averaged three of these days. That's right - since decimalization occurred, we've been twice as less likely to see a 9-to-1 day!

With the impressive move over the past few days, a lot of the shorter-term measures I watch have become very stretched, which usually results in a multi-day pullback. We're coming out of intermediate-term oversold conditions, though, so we shouldn't see a move all the way back to the recent lows. If so, I'd have to question the idea that what we've seen is a valid bottom.

 

[dan24]

buongiorno

euro/yen....oltre al rimbalzo stratosferico son riusciti ad annullare il trend negativo e rigirarsi di nuovo long anche sul daily.....quindi a meno di cataclismi scordiamoci un down trend di medio sull'euro/yen....al limite lateral cazzeggio all'interno di un'ampia fascia....di range...

cmq per adesso mi attendo un pullback per lo meno in area 156,20/155,80.....che se retti darebbero nuovo impulso rialzista con primi tp di nuovo sui 158 ed a salire....
Se non pullbacccca va dritto a 158,07 ma mi pare eccessivo..visto il gra-fica

 

[dan24]

buongiorno

euro/yen....oltre al rimbalzo stratosferico son riusciti ad annullare il trend negativo e rigirarsi di nuovo long anche sul daily.....quindi a meno di cataclismi scordiamoci un down trend di medio sull'euro/yen....al limite lateral cazzeggio all'interno di un'ampia fascia....di range...

cmq per adesso mi attendo un pullback per lo meno in area 156,20/155,80.....che se retti darebbero nuovo impulso rialzista con primi tp di nuovo sui 158 ed a salire....
Se non pullbacccca va dritto a 158,07 ma mi pare eccessivo..visto il gra-fica



Immagine sostituita con URL per un solo Quote: http://www.investireoggi.it/phpBB2/immagini/1174631583eurojpy.png

scorpacciata di pippes

 

[gengiskan]

prova

 

[dan24]

scorpacciata di pippes

peccato..me la sono fatta solo a metà la discesa e con 100.000 pezzi e basta...

 

[dan24]

una struttura grafica del genere ha dell'incrdibile veramente....e non può reggere se non con una pausa almeno di brevissimo......

sono short di eurostox...da stamani a 4100...vediamo

il grafico è l'indice.......e una tale rimbalzo senza nessun intervallo...in 6 giorni....ha veramente dell'illogico....mi attendo almeno 50 punti down....dai max di ieri....vediamo

 

[Fleursdumal]

Bonjour a tout les bondaroles

ti seguo dan, sono short sulla borsa di Calcutta , tra un po' mi arriva conferma dello short su Madras seguono Mumbai e New Dehli