Research.LeutholdGroup

Read this week's Major Trend. 

The latest CPI report was largely in line with consensus. The combination of easy monetary and expansive fiscal policy, from both the U.S. and China, materially raises the risk of higher inflation over the next year.

Read this week's Major Trend. 

Sharply rising projections for EPS are a reason this market doesn’t seem quite as bubbly as its price tag suggests. Barring a sudden collapse, 2024 will be just the third year in which forward earnings estimates and the forward P/E multiple both increase by more than 10%.

Big November gains in 2022 and 2023 were clearly kick-off events, while the more speculative backdrop of late 2024 makes the latest November jump look more like a blow-off. Nonetheless, market internals do not reflect a bull that’s ready to top out: The S&P 500 simply has too much companionship at recent highs, including cyclical stocks, financials, and small caps.

The election gave small caps and Financials a boost, but didn’t help value stocks as hoped. Momentum and growth were the main winners within large caps, while no factors worked well among small caps, where more speculative names benefited.

Financials had another boost as the sector should thrive under the new administration. Among others, less regulatory oversight and weaker capital controls are apt to improve profitability. Within Info Tech, several industries that contain top AI-beneficiaries have deteriorated; both Semiconductors and Tech Hardware Storage & Peripherals are now rated Unattractive.

Revenues progressed for 75% of S&P 500 companies reporting, but only 60% of those realized gains in operating income. Pretax and net income continued to drop, such that headway in the bottom-line was positive for barely more than half of the firms.

The S&P 500 returned to its winning ways in November, logging its largest monthly advance (+5.7%) in a year; over the last 13 months, the index has a price gain of 44%.  

With the second month of Q3 reporting complete, the ratio of up-earnings to down-earnings was an improvement over the same period last quarter and the highest “two-month” figure in two years. Still, this vignette is hovering in the grey zone of results that aren’t deemed recessionary but are decidedly below average. 

The S&P 500’s estimated bottom-up operating EPS was flat during the second month of Q3 results (Chart 1). With reporting essentially complete, the final Q3 figure will be roughly 1.5% below what was ultimately projected before the quarter’s announcements began. That’s a decent divergence from Q1 and Q2, which came in at 0.7% and 0.3% ahead of their respective “pre-reporting” estimates. The shrinkage in Q3 EPS is more in tune with long-term trends but also marks the end of a nice window of higher results—which is a rarity. Traditional EPS erosion is also evident in the snail trail for the anticipated outcome in Q4 .

Read this week's Major Trend. 

Read this week's Major Trend. 

Information Technology has led the market higher this year, gaining 37% to rank as the leader among all eleven sectors as of November 8th. However, there is a return anomaly within this sector that catches our attention. The S&P 500’s Semiconductor sub-industry has risen 96% while the Semiconductor Equipment sub-industry is up just 9%, miles behind the semiconductor group. The divergence seen in Chart 1 seems hard to fathom given the fundamentally interconnected nature of these two business models.

Read this week's MTI update.

The latest CPI report was largely in line with consensus. Our scorecard shows the trend of disinflation has stalled.

Read this week's Major Trend.

The most notable gainer in last week’s Trump Bump 2.0 was the Russell 2000. That index’s weekly surge of +8.6% was its best since the wild pandemic gyrations of April 2020. Yet, this latest Trump-associated upswing fell short of the Russell 2000’s election-week return of +10.2% in 2016 when Trump was the clear underdog.

In October, we published a new election barometer using the DJIA to predict the winner. It failed! Interestingly, the last time this model did not correctly pick the winner was also a year in which the sitting president, who was eligible to run, declined to do so—in 1968.

We’d expect monthly jobs numbers to confirm a recession, not forecast one. This cycle, though, employment reports have been warning of a downturn for 2½ years. It would be easy to call them misfires, but red flags keep coming. If a soft landing was in store, the jobs numbers should have improved by now. 

Given the beginning of an easing cycle in September and the Trump Trade in October, the lack of steepening in the yield curve is intriguing. While tighter financial conditions are likely a challenge to the steepening move, policy regimes and the term premium are favorable toward further curve steepening.

Based on leading economic indicators, a case could be made for the Fed to cut rates again. Stocks are telling another story: Based on market momentum and valuation, an impending rate cut might be the least justified one in modern history.

Last year ended with an extremely rare nine-week winning streak, and the S&P 500 is still charting extraordinary upside momentum more than 10 months later. Historically, after a one-year stock surge of this magnitude (>35%), the U.S. has never declined into recession over the next 12 months.

Despite outperformance of value and small-cap stocks, actively-managed value and small-cap portfolios both struggled. No style box managed a clear win in favor of active management, which is unusual for such leadership conditions. There are several explanations that can account for this behavior.

With the closely intertwined businesses of semiconductors and semiconductor equipment, it is not surprising that the two industries have historically performed similarly. Yet, in 2024, a colossal disconnect has emerged, with semi-equipment stocks up a paltry 5%, miles behind the booming semiconductors.

Read this week's Major Trend. 

The S&P 500’s estimated bottom-up operating EPS shrank 2% during the first month of Q3 reporting (Chart 1). A similar, slightly larger drop in the EPS estimate was experienced in July, as results were tallied for Q2’s first month of reporting. That initial Q2 deficit was recouped over the next two months and actual results eventually ended higher than what was projected at the beginning of earnings season. To maintain this year’s strong earnings streak, where results match estimates (not common), we’ll need another “spring-back” scenario at the back end of Q3.

Read this week's Major Trend. 

It’s been awhile since readers have looked to The Leuthold Group for a rosier take on the stock market than what they can get from Wall Street. But there’s a time and place for everything.

Some were unnerved this week to hear the usually cheery strategist of a major U.S. investment bank predict S&P 500 total returns for the next decade of just +3% per year. While depressing, our work does not find that forecast out of line. We estimate that if S&P 500 5-Yr. Normalized EPS grow at their 1957-to-date annualized rate of +6.3% for the next ten years, and the P/E multiple on those future EPS were to revert to its median level for the same time period (19.4x versus today’s 31.6x), the S&P 500’s annualized total return out to late 2034 would be +2.6%.

The relative performance of small caps lags the S&P 500 by 75% since 2018, and we wondered why.  Was the Magnificent 7 effect so exaggerated that Info Tech and Communication Services, the sectors at the epicenter of the mega-cap growth boom, created such an overwhelmingly high hurdle that small caps were not able to keep pace with these powerhouse companies?  Alternatively, has small cap weakness been the product of sluggish results across multiple sectors, irrespective of the mega-cap growth issue, such that large caps were superior no matter which direction you looked? We label these two hypotheses as “deep” (relating specifically to the narrow but intense Mag 7 effect in Info Tech and Comm Services) or “wide” (describing failings across most small cap companies and industries) and designed this study to identify the most likely explanation.

Read this week's Major Trend.

We take a historical look at potential implications of the market’s strong upside momentum for both the stock market and the economy.

Read this week's Major Trend. 

The latest CPI report was a tad higher than consensus. Our scorecard shows the trend of disinflation stays intact.

Read this week's Major Trend. 

Due to a falloff in our sector rankings, exposure to IT in our equity portfolio has dropped sharply over the past year. Elevated valuations, combined with poor relative strength, overbought signals, and slowing growth are the primary impetus for the declining scores.

Market reaction to the latest flood of monetary and fiscal stimuli has been spectacular. While conviction about Beijing’s attempts to revive its flagging economy has been severely lacking, this time we should believe it. It’s certainly the right medicine China needs and the spark of confidence these actions will ignite should not be underestimated.

An economic downtown with little or no forewarning from stock prices is possible, but against the odds. Nonetheless, prior to 1950, there were three cases in which stock market gains failed to inoculate the economy against a recession. Today’s the stock market capitalization has become so large relative to the economy that stock price movements affect the outlook for growth and inflation more than ever before. 

Extreme stimulus announced by China had the desired effect of spiking the country’s stock market. The move did not trigger our EM Allocation Model; however, if the reversal is for real, there is plenty of time. The EM P/E multiple gap is so extreme that one wouldn’t miss out if they prefer to wait for more compelling confirmation than the fireworks of the last couple of weeks.

An excellent forecaster of election outcomes over the last 100 years is the stock market, itself. Measured over the three-month period through election day, if the S&P 500 has a gain, the incumbent party historically prevails; a negative return predicts a loss for the incumbent. This simple method has correctly identified the White House winner in 20 of the past 24 elections.