The Dow, l'indice più manipolato del mondo

[FeRR@]

Non sapevo bene dove scrivere questa notizia, ma forse il posto che le compete è una dscussione tutta sua. Perchè? Perchè tutte le volte che leggo commenti sul Dow Jones, analisi e previsioni sull'economia americana basandosi su questo indice .... sorrido.

Forse questa notizia finalmente farà ragionare qualcuno. Il colosso americano AIG verrà delistato dal paniere.


Kraft Foods Inc. will replace American International Group Inc. in the Dow Jones Industrial Average effective Monday, a further sign of the woes afflicting the insurance giant.


Giusto per commentare in forma completa questa notizia: all'interno del Dow Jones il settore bancario/finanziario pesava meno del 7%, già prima del crollo di AIG. Ora senza questa siamo circa al 6%. Hanno aggiunto Kraft bacause the index has no food companies.


L'indice più manipolato e fasullo al mondo (o quasi) non si smentisce. Complimenti vivissimi!

 

[f4f]

Non sapevo bene dove scrivere questa notizia, ma forse il posto che le compete è una dscussione tutta sua. Perchè? Perchè tutte le volte che leggo commenti sul Dow Jones, analisi e previsioni sull'economia americana basandosi su questo indice .... sorrido.

Forse questa notizia finalmente farà ragionare qualcuno. Il colosso americano AIG verrà delistato dal paniere.


Kraft Foods Inc. will replace American International Group Inc. in the Dow Jones Industrial Average effective Monday, a further sign of the woes afflicting the insurance giant.


Giusto per commentare in forma completa questa notizia: all'interno del Dow Jones il settore bancario/finanziario pesava meno del 7%, già prima del crollo di AIG. Ora senza questa siamo circa al 6%. Hanno aggiunto Kraft bacause the index has no food companies.




L'indice più manipolato e fasullo al mondo (o quasi) non si smentisce. Complimenti vivissimi!

grazie
adesso ho capito alcune cosette ...

 

[alingtonsky]

In passato nel Dow Jones c' era Philip Morris che controllava Kraft. Poi Philip Morris aveva cambiato nome in Altria (MO) . Successivamente Kraft (KFT)e Philip Morris (PM) sono state collocate in borsa separatamente.
Quindi quello di Kraft poteva essere considerato un ritorno, non era indice di manipolazione.
AIG visto il crollo della sua capitalizzazione non poteva più restare in un indice come il Dow Jones IA.
Nel DJIA ci sono comunque titoli finanziari come Bank of America, JPM, AXP e Citigroup


http://it.finance.yahoo.com/q/cp?s=%5EDJI

10:59 a.m. EDT Oct. 29, 2008
Kraft Foods Inc., one of the world's largest food makers, said Wednesday that third-quarter net income more than doubled after exiting the Post cereal business as well as being helped by product-price increases and cost cuts.

"While the global economy has worsened I feel even more confident about our business prospects," Kraft Chief Executive Irene Rosenfeld said in a conference call. "Our results have again shown that we're able to build our business momentum despite significant headwinds."
Food companies have been looking to gain from the increased number of Americans eating food at home as the U.S. economy has hit the skids. At the same time, Kraft and other well-known food makers have run into stiffer competition from store-brand items that cost less.
Analysts say Kraft's cheese business is vulnerable in the current economic slowdown. Over the past 12 weeks, the company has been losing market share to cheaper private-label cheese, while its non-frozen dinners and mayonnaise have gained ground, according to Citigroup.

http://www.marketwatch.com/news/sto...1C272-9540-4E6A-8AA7-E96B15C7815E}&dist=msr_2

 

[alingtonsky]

Recovering from bear markets


A proper read of history shows that it took the stock market far less time to recover than the Dow data suggest.
In fact, according to a chart published in "Stocks For The Long Run," the classic book by Wharton finance professor Jeremy Siegel, the inflation-adjusted total return index of the U.S. stock market was higher by 1936 or 1937 than it was at its pre-crash peak in 1929. That was just three or four years after the end of the 1929-1933 bear market, and less than eight years after the market's 1929 pre-crash peak?
Why the big difference?
The first big factor is dividends. The market's dividend yield was substantial during the 1930s. At the depths of the Great Depression, in fact, that yield was in the double digits Ignoring dividends, which is what investors unwittingly do when focusing on price alone, therefore introduces a significant pessimistic bias into any historical analysis.
Another factor is inflation. Or, to be more accurate, deflation. Believe it or not, the Consumer Price Index dropped by 27% between its 1929 peak and its low in 1933. A stock that dropped by less than this amount in nominal terms over this four-year period therefore actually turned a profit in inflation-adjusted terms.

Yet another reason why it took the Dow so long to surmount its 1929 peak: The decision in 1939 to delete International Business Machines (IBM) from the average. It wasn't added back until years later. According to Norman Fosback, editor of Fosback's Fund Forecaster, the Dow would today be more than twice its quoted level had IBM not been removed from the Average in 1939.

http://www.marketwatch.com/news/sto...15F1-48D1-9810-AB0FD25B9948}&dist=SecMostRead

Pochi sanno che se IBM non fosse stata rimossa dal Dow Jones nel 1939 per essere poi inserita nuovamente nell' indice diversi anni dopo, il valore del Dow sarebbe circa il doppio di quello attuale.

 

[ElDiego]

Il DowJones non sembra essere l'unico indice ad avere qualche problema,
vedere lo S&P500... leggere per credere... :

By Kristina Cooke and Dan Wednesday November 19, 6:58 pm ET
NEW YORK (Reuters) - One hundred and one.

No, that's not Dalmatians but the number of stocks in the U.S. benchmark S&P 500 index now trading for less than $10 a share.

In fact, $10 would get you 10 shares of online broker E*Trade (NasdaqGS:ETFC - News), now the cheapest stock in the index at 98 cents a share. At the other end of this low-ball spectrum you can get a small slice of the garbage business with a share of Allied Waste (NYSE:AW - News) at $9.90.

In between lies a raft of household names, many formerly held up as blue chips, including Citigroup (NYSE:C - News; $6.40), Alcoa (NYSE:AA - News; $8.16), Xerox (NYSERX - News; $5.58), Motorola (NYSE:MOT - News; $3.44), Starbucks (NasdaqGSBUX - News; $7.97) and Yahoo (NasdaqGS:YHOO - News; $9.14), not to mention beleaguered automakers Ford Motor (NYSE:F - News; $1.26) and General Motors (NYSE:GM - News; $2.79).

In all, the group makes up the greatest number of sub-$10 stocks in the index in at least 28 years, said Howard Silverblatt, senior index analyst at Standard & Poor's.

In fact, Silverblatt said it could be the most in the post-World-War II era, though he cautioned that his data reaches only as far back as 1980.

"This is definitely unusual," he said. "I think you'd have to go back as far as the 1940s, when $10 was worth more to see a similar number," he said.

According to S&P data, 101 is almost double the 59 companies with share prices below $10 in October 2001 when the dotcom meltdown was in full swing and almost triple the 35 sub-$10 stocks in October 1987.

Ten dollars is more than just a psychological barrier. Some institutional investors cannot invest in shares below $10 and some bond contracts require companies above that level.

Some other gloomy facts: only five S&P 500 companies had share prices of more than $100 on Wednesday.

So far this year, the S&P 500 has plunged 45 percent. It is now worth just over $7 trillion, the index's lowest collective market value in 11 years.

Twenty-five stocks, or five percent of the index, don't make the $1 billion mark in market cap, and just 11 exceed the $100 billion level.

In fact, a third of the entire index is not even qualified to be in the index -- 186 stocks have market caps under $4 billion, the minimum value for consideration for S&P 500 membership.

 

[alingtonsky]

quindi un problema sarebbe il prezzo sotto $10 di certe azioni ? E' francamente assurdo che certi istituzionali non possano investire in azioni che hanno un prezzo sotto i $10 senza riguardo per capitalizzazione, dividendi, P/E etc.
Allora azioni che non avevano fatto uno split in passato sarebbero avvantaggiate?
Basterebbe fare un accorpamento o un reverse-split che riduca il numero di azioni e ne aumenti di conseguenza il prezzo riportandolo ampiamente sopra $10?

 

[ElDiego]

Condivido le tue perplessità, aling...Se ne inventano sempre di tutti i colori,
ma un modo per farli tornare sopra i 10$, no ?
Comunque rimarebbe il problema del terzo delle companie che ormai non
dovrebbero più essere quotate nell'indice S&P500, per capitale largamente
inferiore ai 4B$ richiesti... Ecco un altro articolo sul tema :
http://www.tradersnarrative.com/sp-500-index-now-more-poor-less-standard-2087.html