The Best Buy Signal of 2012

The Best Buy Signal of 2012

by Alexander Green, Investment U Chief Investment Strategist
Monday, January 02, 2012: Issue #1677

Investors are scared right now and it’s not hard to see why.

Economic growth is anemic. Unemployment is high. Banks are saddled with toxic assets. Problems in the Eurozone continue to fester. Residential real estate is sinking in a mire of short sales and foreclosures. And both federal and state governments – not to mention consumers themselves – are drowning in a sea of red ink.

We have all heard these negatives repeated daily and cycled endlessly in the national media.

However, these reports often leave out or play down the good news: Inflation is low. Short-term rates are near zero. Energy and food prices are declining. Emerging market economies – which are end markets for the developed world – are still booming. Corporate profits are at an all-time record – and have been for seven quarters now. And stock valuations are low. (The S&P 500 has historically traded at an average of 16 times earnings. Today it’s less than 14 times earnings.)

Last year I shared another key insight with you. It has always been a positive indicator for stocks when the Dow yields more than Treasury bonds.

This makes sense when you think about it. Shares are riskier than bonds. Investors should demand a higher yield. Yet almost never since 1958 have stocks yielded more than Treasuries. Today they do, however. The 10-year bond yields just two percent. The Dow yields 30 percent more.

If you’re still not convinced that equities are a good place to be in 2012, let me draw your attention to one of the strongest indicators of all…

Contrarian Investing Works

It’s a truism that no one consistently predicts the stock market. (That’s why money manager and Forbes 400 member Ken Fisher calls it “The Great Humiliator.”) However, there’s a straightforward system that offers a reasonable prospect of timing the market reasonably well in the future.

A 25-year study published last year in The Journal of Financial Economics found that if you had simply invested in the S&P 500 when equity fund flows were negative (redemptions exceeded new investments) and into 90-day Treasury bills when fund flows were positive (new investments exceeded redemptions) you would have substantially outperformed the market while spending nearly half the time in riskless T-bills.

In other words, contrarian investing works. This system would have you do the very inverse of what the great mass of investors is doing. (It turns out they have god-awful instincts, so it pays to buck the consensus.)

Bear in mind, if you’d followed this system, you wouldn’t just have earned higher returns than being fully invested. You would have done it with far less risk, spending nearly half the time in riskless T-bills.

I mention this because the Investment Company Institute recently reported that investors are yanking billions out of equity funds virtually every week and pouring the money into ultra-low-paying money market accounts. The Wall Street Journal further reports that “investors have continued to consistently pull money from U.S. equity funds since August.”

I’m trying to contain my glee. Who says no one rings a bell in the stock market?

The fear and pessimism about both the economy and the stock market are way overdone and fully discounted in current stock prices. If you can’t be stirred by low interest rates, low inflation, low valuations and record profits, you really should ask yourself two important questions:

1. Is logic or emotion governing my decision making about my portfolio?

2. If I don’t invest in stocks – the greatest wealth creator of all time – how am I going to meet my long-term financial goals?

We’ll talk more about these issues in the weeks ahead. But, for the record, I think 2012 will be a good year for the stock market and – although virtually no one expects or believes it – perhaps even a barnburner.

Good Investing,

Alexander Green

The One Place to Invest for Growth, Income… and Safety

The One Place to Invest for Growth, Income… and Safety

by Alexander Green, Investment U Chief Investment Strategist
Monday, November 14, 2011: Issue #1642

Eight weeks ago, I wrote an Investment U column pounding the table for dividend stocks. Since then, they’ve ratcheted higher, but I still see plenty of upside ahead.

Someone who shares my enthusiasm for high-yield stocks right now is my friend and former colleague Rick Pfeifer, Senior Portfolio Manager at Fund Advisors of America, a  Florida-based money management firm.

On a recent trip to the sunshine state, I stopped into his office to hear why he, too, feels this is one of the best places to put your money to work today.

Q: Rick, there’s an awful lot of fear and anxiety about the economy and the stock market right now. Investors are confused and uncertain about what to do with their money. What is your take on things?

A: In a market as volatile as this, you have to spread your bets. But my take is this: If you’re looking for growth, buy dividend-paying stocks.

If you’re looking for income, buy dividend-paying stocks. If you’re looking for safety, buy dividend-paying stocks.

Q: Why?

A: The first question every investor has to ask himself is, “How should I divide my money among stocks, bonds and cash?”

The average money market fund currently pays two one-hundredths of one percent. At that rate, you will double your money in just 3,600 years.

Q: Not terribly attractive.

A: Definitely not.

And Treasury yields won’t make you jump up and click your heels, either. The 10-year guy is yielding two percent, which translates – at best – to a zero-percent yield after inflation.

Q: Tough to meet your investment goals that way.

A: Right.

In my view, dividend stocks are a good place to be right now for several reasons. Let’s talk about safety first. When the Dow traded at these levels 11 ½ years ago, it sold for 47 times earnings. Today it trades at less than 14 times earnings. Stocks are cheap right now on the basis of sales and earnings.

But even during market declines, dividend-paying stocks hold up better than non-dividend-paying stocks and sometimes fight the broad trend and rise in value. The reason is obvious. These tend to be mature, profitable companies with stable outlooks, plenty of cash and long-term staying power.

Q: U.S. companies are sitting on a record amount of cash now, too, right?

A: Correct.

U.S. companies currently hold more than $2 trillion in cash, a record. Thanks to this economy and the current Administration (don’t get me started), companies aren’t hiring and they’re not boosting spending. So a lot of this cash is rightfully going back to shareholders.

The Dow currently yields more than bonds. And dividend growth among U.S. companies has averaged 10 percent per year over the last two years, more than double the long-term dividend growth rate.

Q: Okay. Dividend stocks are less risky than non-dividend payers and currently pay more than cash or bonds. But how do you think this group will perform in the years ahead?

A: We can only use long-term historical performance as a guide, but the numbers are pretty darn encouraging. Over the last 50 years, for instance, the highest 20 percent yielding stocks in the S&P 500 returned 14.2 percent annually.

That’s good enough to double your money every five years – or quadruple it in 10. And if you were even more selective, say investing only in the 10 highest yielding stocks of the 100 largest companies in the S&P 500, your annual return would have been even better, 15.7 percent.

Q: We should add the standard caveat here about past performance and point out that there are risks with dividend stocks, too, right?

A: Indeed. You have to be selective. An investor would be foolish to plunk for a stock just because the dividend is large. The market is full of “dividend traps,” troubled companies that pay hefty dividends to keep investors from bailing out.

Q: How does an investor avoid those?

A: Mainly, by doing his or her homework. You need to look at prospective sales and earnings growth. You have to examine the balance sheet and make sure that the company isn’t too highly leveraged.

You have to note cash balances. And, perhaps most importantly, you need to analyze whether the payout ratio is sustainable.

Q: So can you give us a few examples of high-yielders that have you been buying in your managed accounts lately?

A: I’ve been nibbling at Windstream Corp. (Nasdaq: WIN), a well-run communications and networking company with an 8.3-percent current yield. I like oil and gas producer Enerplus (NYSE: ERF), with its high operating margins and 7.7-percent dividend.

And – this one is a bit different – I’ve been picking up a 10.3-percent yield with the Gabelli Global Gold Trust (AMEX: GGN). There are plenty of other attractive high-yield situations out there, too. They should be owned, of course, as part of a more broadly diversified portfolio.

Q: I agree, Rick. Thanks for your time. Let’s chat about this sector again in a few weeks.

Good investing,

Alexander Green

Will You Fall Prey to “Headline Risk”?

Will You Fall Prey to “Headline Risk”?

by Alexander Green, Investment U Chief Wealth Strategist
Friday, September 2, 2011: Issue #1592

In the last couple of months, millions of investors have done a 180. It happens all the time. And – just as in the past – they will surely come to regret it.

The story is as old as equities themselves. When the market is an uptrend, investors focus on opportunity and considerations of risk go out the window. When the market is in the tank, they focus on risk and forget about opportunity.

This is the very opposite of what you should be doing.

During my 16-year career as an investment advisor and portfolio manager, I used to show new clients a 200-year chart of the stock market and ask them to identify the best buying opportunities.

Invariably, they pointed to the periods when the market had cratered.

I asked if they would be willing to step up and take advantage of such opportunities in the future. Most nodded vigorously and assured me that they would.

Few actually did.

Why? Because you can never imagine the news backdrop that will accompany a major stock market decline.

When the market recovered – as it always does – these same investors kick themselves for not scooping up bargains when stocks were cheap. Yet when the market declined again, they would generally react the very same way.

Nothing could be simpler than to say, “buy low, sell high.” But pulling the trigger when times are tough isn’t easy.

How to Avoid Headline Risk

It’s easy to fall prey to “Headline Risk.” Here’s what I mean…

On August 9, national newspaper and television headlines shouted that the Dow had plunged 634 points the previous day. That was not an insubstantial drop. It amounted to a 5.5 percent decline in the index.

Yet few sources reminded investors that the Dow was still up 66 percent (excluding dividends) from the market lows 2 ½ years ago. Or that the drop wasn’t even in the top 50 for largest daily percentage losses.

Similarly, the media made a big deal about the market sell-off the week of August 1 to 5 representing an evaporation of more than $4 trillion in world equity values. That’s a big number. (Unless you’re a Congressman, apparently.) Yet the total value of all stocks worldwide is approximately $55 trillion. And, for the overwhelming majority of investors, these were temporary paper losses.

Where was the context? There wasn’t any. The media needs sensationalism to grab viewers’ attention. Newspapers, magazines and television shows aren’t interested in helping you reach your financial goals. They’re interested in helping their marketing departments sell advertising. Sensationalism does just that.

Understand this and you can inoculate yourself against “Headline Risk.” Scary headlines create strong emotions. But strong emotions are usually the prelude to bad investment decisions.

Flee common stocks – the greatest wealth creator of all time – and where will you go? Into 10-year Treasuries yielding 2 percent? Into money market accounts paying next to nothing? Into gold which has already risen six-fold in the past 10 years? Into residential real estate which is mired in a sea of foreclosures?

High quality stocks are still your best bet to meet your long-term financial goals. National headlines are screaming just the opposite, of course, just as they have during every major buying opportunity of the past 75 years.

The truth is your greatest risk is not market fluctuations. It’s that your money fails to keep up with inflation – or that your investment portfolio kicks the bucket before you do.

Consider that before extravagant headlines prompt you to do something foolish.

Good investing,

Alexander Green

The Best Buy Signal in 53 Years

The Best Buy Signal in 53 Years

by Alexander Green, Investment U’s Chief Investment Strategist
Thursday, August 25, 2011: Issue #1586

Just weeks before the stock market made a dramatic bottom in early 2009, I wrote an Investment U column entitled “One of The Best Buy Signals in 51 Years.”

It was one of our most widely read columns that year – and syndicated many other places, as well.

I have no idea how many readers acted on my analysis at the time. After all, the financial crisis was in full swing and investor sentiment – to quote Jed Clampett – “was lower than a hog’s jaw on market day.”

But those who bought stocks on this signal made gobs of money in the months that followed. After all, the market essentially doubled between the lows of 2009 to the highs earlier this year.

Now – for only the second time in 53 years – this uncanny signal is flashing again. Here’s what it is and why you should take advantage of one of the best and most accurate signals in stock market history…

Market Yields: Stock vs. U.S. Treasuries

In the first half of the twentieth century, investors found that if you bought stocks only when the market’s yield exceeded the yield on 10-year Treasuries, you would have been in for every single major rally.

The returns were huge – and the system made perfect sense. Stocks are riskier than bonds, market participants reasoned, so they should yield more to compensate for greater volatility and the likelihood of occasional losses.

The system worked like a charm until 1958. Then it stopped cold. Why? Because for the next 50 years, stocks never yielded more than Treasuries.

Public companies began using their cash flow to fund operations and acquisitions rather than paying out dividends to shareholders. With stock yields sharply lower, most analysts reasoned that the indicator was dead, that the yield on stocks would never again top bonds.

And, indeed, it took a full blown financial crisis but two and a half years ago to finally happen again. With the luxury of hindsight, we can see that was yet another superb buying opportunity. And today it’s happening yet again thanks to both the tremendous rally in government bonds and the socking that stocks have undergone. For only the second time since 1958, stocks are yielding more than bonds.

Granted, it’s a squeaker. As I write, the 10-year Treasury is yielding 2.07 percent. The S&P 500 yields 2.16 percent. Of course the S&P 500 Index was only created in 1957. It was the Dow that investors used in the first half of the last century. And the yield on the Dow is more than 50 percent higher at 3.24 percent.

History Says… Stocks Are a Terrific Long-Term Buy

If history is any guide, that means stocks are a terrific long-term “Buy” right now and Treasuries – which have become a complete bubble and a table-pounding “Sell” in my estimation – are due for a long period of underperformance.

True, GDP growth is likely to be anemic in the months ahead. But – shocking and surprising most investors – stocks (and especially dividend-paying stocks) should do exceptionally well.

There are no guarantees in the world of stock market investing, of course. But as Patrick Henry famously said, “I know no way of judging the future but by the past.”

Good investing,

Alexander Green

Editor’s Note: So how can you capitalize on the best buy signal in the last 53 years? As Alex said, it’s important to focus on dividend-paying stocks… And the best way to read Alex’s favorite picks and his regular market commentary is to join The Oxford Club…

Is It Different This Time?

Is It Different This Time?

by Alexander Green, Investment U’s Chief Investment Strategist
Monday, August 22, 2011: Issue #1583

Investment legend John Templeton famously said that the biggest mistake an investor can make is to say “this time it’s different.”

In some ways, this statement may seem a little strange.  On the surface, every market correction is different. For example, when the stock market imploded on October 19, 1987, falling over 22 percent in a single session, that was unexpected. After all, no government failed that morning. No currency collapsed. No President was shot. To this day, pundits still argue about why the stock market crashed.

Or how about the bear market of 1990? No one foresaw Saddam Hussein rolling into Kuwait that August, taking over the country and its oil fields. Investors worldwide speculated that the Middle East would go up in flames. (And, indeed, many Kuwaiti oil fields did.) That was certainly different.

Then there was the collapse of hedge fund giant Long-Term Capital in 1998. Fed Chairman Alan Greenspan feared that unwinding the fund’s highly leveraged positions would turn the bond market upside down. He worked behind the scenes to get major Wall Street firms to help bail out the fund. That was something new.

Or how about the March 2000 to October 2002 bear market that started with the collapse of technology and Internet stocks? It was the end of an era, the deflating of a bubble. We hadn’t seen anything like that in modern history.

Or how about 9/11? Who woke up that day suspecting that a group of zealots would fly planes full of people into buildings? Not me.

The mania for residential real estate six years ago was something curious, too. And so was the collapse of sub-prime mortgages. That led to an unprecedented financial crisis and a harrowing drop in the Dow. You don’t see something like that every day.

So was Templeton out of his mind when he declared it foolish to say “this time it’s different?” Of course not. Templeton well understood that the particular events that cause a market decline will always vary. What shouldn’t vary is the way you respond to it as an investor.

If you bought into the market crash of 1987, you did very well over the next few years.  After the bear market of 1990, stocks went on a remarkable 10-year run. If you bought into the secular bear market of 2000 to 2002, you also made out handily over the next five years. And, of course, the market almost doubled from the lows of the financial crisis in 2009.

Here we are today and the stock market has swooned again, this time due to sovereign debt problems here and in Europe. Nothing like this has happened in recent history.

So the question you face now is whether to take advantage of the sell-off and buy great companies at bargain prices or… to insist “this time’s it’s different.”

The choice is yours.

Good investing,

Alexander Green