International markets traders banter

[Valued]

Well I will let you guys know if I go bankrupt.* I have shorted multiple markets, not the dax though. If the markets now rally hard you know I was wrong and you can all beat me with a big stick. It's a longer term trade though, holding time probably weeks unless I get stopped out. The bulls may run me over yet


*not really, but I might blow most of my profits from a recent excellent trade.

 

[CanOz]

Saw this on the twatter, thought I'd share....

Gurus and thier recent calls....

 

[sinner]

Saw this on the twatter, thought I'd share....

Gurus and thier recent calls....

I recognise Janjuah, Gartman, Gross and Cramer.

Who are the other heads?

Funny pic but I imagine it's forcing the point a little, as Gartman flips positions every other day, he was probably long stocks and short bonds the day before and the day after that call :

I think it always pays to remember that the outcome of any individual trade, position or call is always 50:50 (or close) unless you believe that they can predict the future. These guys aren't pushing their entire AUM to be long or short based on what they call on Bloomberg or CNBC, they're pretty much always long bonds and short equity vol (or equivalent).

 

[CanOz]

I recognise Janjuah, Gartman, Gross and Cramer.

Who are the other heads?

Funny pic but I imagine it's forcing the point a little, as Gartman flips positions every other day, he was probably long stocks and short bonds the day before and the day after that call :

I think it always pays to remember that the outcome of any individual trade, position or call is always 50:50 (or close) unless you believe that they can predict the future. These guys aren't pushing their entire AUM to be long or short based on what they call on Bloomberg or CNBC, they're pretty much always long bonds and short equity vol (or equivalent).

All i recognized were Gartman, Ichan, Gross and Cramer...i just thought it was a funny chart

 

[Wysiwyg]

All i recognized were Gartman, Ichan, Gross and Cramer...i just thought it was a funny chart

Carl Icahn's attempt to suck in the newbies.

When Carl Icahn put together an elaborate presentation on why he thought the stock market was in trouble, investors took notice ”” and started buying.

In fact, Icahn's doom-saying seems to have had just the opposite effect, with the market staging its strongest run of the year just as the famed activist investor pushed the opposite case.

Since his video, titled "Danger Ahead," hit Sept. 29 ”” followed by a CNBC appearance the following day ”” the S&P 500 has been on something of a tear, gaining about 7 percent and making a run at turning positive for the year.

Newbies ----- it's all about the churn.

 

[notting]

To put it nicely ~ Icahn is a total d h.,
He has big bets on the banks.
He needed a rate rise so they can get a bit of space for margins.
So when the fed pulled out of the September rate rise ruining his big bets that the banks would eventually start a bit of a run up, on the back of a rise, he went all out video trashing the market trying to make out that the fed was ruining the world by not rising rates. You know, Fed causing all kinds of bubbles cause money is too easy. Him and Trump should go off and live on a desert Island together with a bottle of baby oil and get out of our faces.

 

[cynic]

It's only taken me 10 days and several hundred trades to recover from my last heavy dosage of post Draghi drawdown. Now I see that he's due to flap his gums yet again!

Will my account survive to see the next sunrise?

 

[Wysiwyg]

Him and Trump should go off and live on a desert Island together with a bottle of baby oil and get out of our faces.

Very large stacks always command attention no matter how much BS passes their lips. Are his client all cash? Oh that's right "it's when it will happen".

 

[notting]

Don't forget the facts - such as the majority of pundits and big wigs were predicting the Fed would move in September.
Fact - August was when the market began to rupture in anticipation of that.
Fact - Markets began to recover when the Fed didn't.
Icahn had bet on the rise and subsequently (when the Fed didn't) came out with all this crap about how the fed had to raise because he was on the wrong side of the trade.
He has no conscience and is as ruthless as you can be, totally motivated by his position regardless of what happens to the economy or anyone else. He will just say what he wants to support his bet. This guy is not someone you should listen to for some kind of general overview.
All along Buffet was saying the market was not overvalued. Listen in that direction for a balanced overveiw if you need one.

 

[CanOz]

Looks like we could be in a spot of bother for a while....

 

[Valued]

China news comes out tonight and tomorrow night as well. Expect some volatility!

 

[Trembling Hand]

China news comes out tonight and tomorrow night as well. Expect some volatility!

Industrial Production? Its been undershooting for years. Ya reckon it would be baked in as another disappointment which would need to be calamitous to actually be bad or chance of it surprising on the upside?

 

[Valued]

Industrial Production? Its been undershooting for years. Ya reckon it would be baked in as another disappointment which would need to be calamitous to actually be bad or chance of it surprising on the upside?

In addition to industrial production there is also retail sales data. I think though because of the sell off yesterday and bad trade data from China the market may be more sensitive to bad news. I also think it will be used as an excuse for people to throw their weight around in the fx markets. Bad news of any kind would be a problem for the AUD and NZD.

 

[sinner]

The last handful sessions have contained mighty interesting moves in the measure of how many S&P500 component stocks are above their 200SMA. Both up and down moves in this measure have been pretty volatile recently, indicating a lot of stocks are experiencing choppy conditions near their yearly means. I added the ROC1 to demonstrate but the line is a little crowded out from the bigger move in Aug.



Besides the volatility, the trendline is what interests me most. Keen to hear others opinions of fewer names joining the party on each run on the index. Sign of weakness to come? Headroom for a rally? New normal where a handful of names run higher while the rest of them hold steady?

Let's just say, this is the good breadth chart, because outside of the large cap sector things seem a lot weaker. Anecdotally, my US holdings aren't participating (mostly flat), and I do hold some Berkshire so I did note those good quality companies picked by Buffet and Munger are in the same boat.

 

[Trembling Hand]

Industrial Production? Its been undershooting for years. Ya reckon it would be baked in as another disappointment which would need to be calamitous to actually be bad or chance of it surprising on the upside?

And it plays out that way. A slight miss followed by a fall in Shanghai and HSI which results in a buying opportunity now back to flat, no move in AUD ...... Next

 

[sinner]

Besides the volatility, the trendline is what interests me most. Keen to hear others opinions of fewer names joining the party on each run on the index. Sign of weakness to come? Headroom for a rally? New normal where a handful of names run higher while the rest of them hold steady?

Answering my own question after spotting this on Dana Lyons' twitter today
http://jlfmi.tumblr.com/post/132922686075/another-less-than-meets-the-eye-nasdaq-rally



It's a NASDAQ study but I'd guess the general rule applies: possible for the index to make significant runs without majority participation.

 

[Trembling Hand]

It's a NASDAQ study but I'd guess the general rule applies: possible for the index to make significant runs without majority participation.

Yeah I find its only a few rare times that breadth signals a big turn - it has to really line up clearly with lots of other stuff. Mostly its a good indication of small cycles 5-20 days but not amplitude of the cycles.

Up>down>up can represent the same breadth pattern as,
up>consolidate>up on the index.

 

[skc]

Interesting article on Bloomberg about "strange things" in the market.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/artic...that-have-been-happening-in-financial-markets

Unintended consequence of Central Bank dominated markets? Early signs of something's about to break? Or just markets evolving and moving on from data of the past?

 

[sinner]

Yeah I find its only a few rare times that breadth signals a big turn - it has to really line up clearly with lots of other stuff. Mostly its a good indication of small cycles 5-20 days but not amplitude of the cycles.

Up>down>up can represent the same breadth pattern as,
up>consolidate>up on the index.

Pretty good analysis from GS here on breadth stuff, including a bunch of things I had never considered like "which factors do best in narrow breadth" (hint, the only one I'm still heavily weighted on does poorly).

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2015-...-very-worried-about-collapsing-market-breadth

 

[DeepState]

Interesting article on Bloomberg about "strange things" in the market.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/artic...that-have-been-happening-in-financial-markets

Unintended consequence of Central Bank dominated markets? Early signs of something's about to break? Or just markets evolving and moving on from data of the past?

Found this interesting. Thanks for posting it.

My take is that these are caused by:
- increased capital charges for market making activity at deposit-taking institutions following Dodd-Frank and Basel recommendations and laws....making markets more jumpy due to lower liquidity...and increasing the premium required for bearing illiquid assets; and
- changes in settlement procedures....taking credit risk out of swaps.

These are not really the outcomes of central bank actions. In general, the central banks have helped to contain volatility since the GFC, in my view. The central banks are still there to offer liquidity over good collateral. However, it is now well accepted that the loss of market making capability has led to a reduction of 'deep' liquidity. The market still looks liquid at touch-to-touch, but doesn't handle large trades as well any more.

This matters a lot when you are setting stops. The effective embedded cost of these stops is now materially higher than it was previously.

All things equal, the market is now more fragile than it had been. Thankfully, the banking system is less levered than it had been. I am concerned that there is risk arising of some other LTCM out there. An entity too-big-to-fail but which is not regulated or subject to capital buffers etc. Where there is a regulation, there will be regulatory arbitrage.