Tagged: value

Growth vs Value

Are you Value or Growth?  

Depends what we mean, I know. S&P Dow Jones says it distinguishes Value with “ratios of book value, earnings and sales to price.”

It matters because Growth is terrorizing Value.  According to data from the investment arm of AllianceBernstein, Growth stocks outperformed Value stocks by 92% between 2015-2020.  Morningstar says it’s the biggest maw on record, topping the 1999 chasm.

If you’re in the Growth group, you’re loving it.  But realize.  By S&P Dow Jones’s measures, anybody could be a Value or Growth stock at any time.  It’s all in the metrics.

The larger question is why the difference?  AllianceBernstein notes that the traditional explanation is earnings growth plus dividends paid.  That is, if your stock is up 50% more than a peer’s, it should be because your earnings and dividends are 50% better.

If that were the case, everybody would be a great stock-picker. All you’d need do is buy stocks with the best earnings growth. 

Well, turns out fundamentals accounted for just ten percentage points of the difference.  The remaining 82% of the spread, as the image here from AllianceBernstein shows, was multiple-expansion.  Paying more for the same thing.

Courtesy AllianceBernstein LP. https://www.alliancebernstein.com/corporate/en/insights/investment-insights/whats-behind-the-value-growth-performance-gap.html

Put differently, 90% of the time Growth stocks outperform Value stocks for no known reason. No wonder stock-picking is hard.

Take Vertex (VRTX) and Fortinet (FTNT), among the two very best and worst stocks of the past year.  I don’t know fundamentally what separates them. One is Tech, the other Healthcare.

I do know that running supply/demand math on the two, there’s a staggering behavioral difference.  FTNT spent 61 days the past year at 10.0 on our ten-point scale measuring demand called Market Structure Sentiment.  It pegged the speedometer 24% of the time.

VRTX spent five days at 10.0.  Two percent of the time.  You need momentum in today’s stock market or you become a Value stock.

We recently shared data with a client who wondered why there was a 20-point spread to the price of a top peer.  We ran the data.  Engagement scores were about the same – 85% to 83%, advantage to our client. Can’t say it’s story then.

But the peer had a 20% advantage in time spent at 10.0.  The behavioral patterns were momentum-style. Our client’s, GARP/Value style.

Okay, Quast.  Suppose I stipulate to the validity of your measure of supply and demand, whatever it is.  Doesn’t answer the question. Why do some stocks become momentum, propelling Growth to a giant advantage over Value?

I think it’s three things. I can offer at least some data, empirical or circumstantial, to support each.

Let’s call the first Herd Behavior.  The explosion of Exchange Traded Funds concentrates herd behavior by using stocks as continuously stepped-up collateral for ETF shares.  I’ll translate.  ETFs don’t invest in stocks, per se.  ETFs trade baskets of ETF shares for baskets of stocks (cash too but let’s keep it simple here). As the stocks go up in value, ETF sponsors can trade them out for ETF shares. Say those ETF shares are value funds.

The supply of Value ETF shares shrinks because there’s less interest in Value.  Then the ETF sponsor asks for the same stocks back to create more Growth ETF shares.

But the taxes are washed out via this process. And more ETF shares are created.  And ETFs pay no commissions on these transactions. They sidestep taxes and commissions and keep gains.  It’s wholly up to traders and market-makers to see that ETF shares track the benchmark or basket.

The point? It leads to herd behavior. The process repeats. Demand for the same stuff is unremitting.  We see it in creation/redemption data for ETFs from the Investment Company Institute. ETF creations and redemptions average over $500 billion monthly. Same stuff, over and over. Herd behavior.

Second, there’s Amplification.  Fast Traders, firms like Infinium, GTS, Tower Research, Hudson River Trading, Quantlab, Jane Street, Two Sigma, Citadel Securities and others amplify price-moves.  Momentum derives from faster price-changes, and Fast Traders feed it.

Third is Leverage with derivatives or borrowing.  Almost 19% of trading volume in the S&P 500 ties to puts, calls and other forms of taking or managing risk with derivatives. Or it can be borrowed money. Or 2-3x levered ETFs. The greater the pool of money using leverage, the larger the probability of outsized moves.

Summarizing, Growth beats Value because of herd behavior, amplification of price-changes, and leverage.

By the way, we can measure these factors behind your price and volume – anybody in the US national market system.

Does that mean the Growth advantage is permanent?  Well, until it isn’t. Economist Herb Stein (Ben’s dad) famously said, “If something cannot last forever, it will stop.”

And it will. I don’t know when. I do know that the turn will prompt the collapse of leverage and the vanishing of amplification. Then Growth stocks will become Value stocks.

And we’ll start again.

Blunderbuss

Do stores sell coats in the summer? 

No, they sell bathing suits. They match product to consumer.  Do you, investor-relations professionals?

I’ll tell you what I mean.  First, here’s a tease:  I recorded a panel yesterday with the Nasdaq’s Chris Anselmo and Kissell Research Group’s Dr. Robert Kissell on How New Trading Patterns Affect IR.

It airs at 4p ET June 22 during the 2021 NIRI Annual Virtual Conference.  Root around in the couch cushions of your IR budget and find some coins and join us.  We’ll be taking questions live around the panel.  Sling some heckling if you want!  It’s a great program.

Now, back to matching product to consumer.  The IR outreach strategy for maintaining relationships with investors often resembles a blunderbuss. Unless you went to elementary school when I did and saw pictures of pilgrims sporting guns with barrels shaped like flugelhorns, you probably don’t know what I’m talking about.

You threw some stuff in the barrel and loaded it with powder and ignited it and hoped some of what belched out went in the general direction you were pointing.

Illustration 165213327 © Dennis Cox | Dreamstime.com

If you don’t have anything better I guess it works. But the IR profession shouldn’t be blunderbussing wildly around.

I get it, Tim.  Be targeted in our outreach.

No, I mean sell your product to consumers who’ll buy it.  Your product is your stock.  Your story is a narrative that may or may not match your product.

Huh?

Stay with me.  I’ll explain.  This is vital.   

Think of it this way. REI is an outdoors store.  It’ll sell you cycling stuff and camping gear in the summer, and skiing gear and coats in the winter.  The data analytics they use are pretty simple: The season changes.

In the stock market, the seasons are relentlessly changing but the temperature doesn’t rise and fall in predictable quadrants to tell you if igloos or swimsuits are in. But the BEHAVIORAL DATA wax and wane like many small seasons.

The Russell 2000 value index is up 30% this year. The Russell 2000 growth index has risen just 3.8%.  Is value more appealing than growth?  No, as both Benzinga and the Wall Street Journal reported, GME and AMC rank 1-2 in the index.

The crafters of the indices didn’t suppose that movie theaters in the age of Covid or a business built on selling games that have moved online were growth businesses.

They’re not. But the products are. These are extreme cases but it happens all the time.

CVX, market cap $210 billion, is in both Value and Momentum State Street SPDR (S&P Depositary Receipts) Exchange Traded Funds. It’s got both characteristics AT DIFFERENT TIMES.

AAPL, in 299 ETFs, is used for focus value, dividend strategies, technology 3x bull leveraged exposure, high growth, luxury goods, risk-manager and climate-leadership investing, among a vast array of other reasons.

Look up your own stock and see what characteristics are prompting ETF ownership.  That’s data you can use.  Don’t know what to do? Ask us. We’ll help.

How can ETFs with diametrically opposed objectives use the same stocks? That’s something every investor-relations professional needs to know. ETFs control $6 trillion in the US alone. They’re not pooled investments and they don’t hold custodial accounts like mutual funds.

Should the IR profession understand what the money is doing in the stock market?

Set that aside for now. There’s an immediate lesson to help us stop behaving like blunderbusses.  Stocks constantly change. I think rather than targeting specific investors, you should build a big tent of folks you know.

And you should RECONNECT with them in highly specific, data-driven ways.  If you just call investors you know to follow up, you’re doing IR like a cave man. Stop doing that.

The deck is already stacked against investors focused on story.  They need all our help they can get! I’ve explained it many times.  Rules promote average prices and harm outliers.  Passives want average prices. Stock pickers want outliers.

If we want investors interested in our stories to succeed, use DATA to help them.

Like this. We met with a Financials component yesterday.  The data show a big surge in Passive money in patterns.  You won’t see it in settlement data.  It never leaves the custodian because it the same money moving from indexes to ETFs and back.

But ModernIR can see it in near realtime.

The IR department should be calling core GROWTH names, even though it’s a value story.  That wave of Passive money is going to lift the stock. Growth money buys appreciation. Value money buys opportunity.

You want to move from blunderbuss to data expert in modern markets?  Ask us.  You don’t have to be way behind like the Russell indices.  You can be way ahead, like a modern IRO.

Get rid of that blunderbuss, pilgrim.   

Blurry

As Thanksgiving nears, we’re giving thanks for a rock-star stock market since last December, when it fell 20%. Can it hold?

In the simplest sense, whatever has been driving it must continue. Thanksgiving is to me the best holiday because it’s introspective. So let’s reflect on what’s behind stocks.

Everyone says corporate earnings, the economy, monetary policy.  The US economy is strong.  Earnings though are weaker the past three quarters than comparable earlier periods, so it’s not that. Monetary policy is easy, which helps by fueling leverage.

Buybacks?  Sure, a contributor. Geopolitics, trade deals, tariffs?  You’d think those might be headwinds. So far, no. Remember, news doesn’t buy or sell stocks. People and machines do.

Fund-flows? Research from Ed Yardeni says bonds have benefited while stocks have suffered. Domestic trends are disturbing – steep declines for years (See Figure 5) as money steadily shifts toward bonds and foreign equities.

Along our path of reflection we come to market structure – and why both companies and investors should learn it. Between Jul 1, 2015 and present there are 1,097 trading days. Of those, 589 are between 4.5-6.0 on ModernIR’s 10-point Market Structure Sentiment buy/sell scale.

Do the math. The ratio (589/1097) is 5.4/10.0. Reads over 5.0 mean machines will lift prices.  It’s a GARP market – growth at a reasonable price.

Now let’s add in the time the market has spent in “Overbought” territory, above 6.0. It’s 301 days, or 27% of the time. It’s been Oversold (below 4.5) 207 days, 19%.

There’s our answer. It’s GARP 54% of the time, momentum 27% of the time, value 19% of the time. It’s more growth than value, more buying than selling.  Whether money comes or goes, if what comes is disposed to pay up, stocks rise.

Contrast with Sep-Dec 2018. During that period when stocks fell about 20%, they were Oversold 44% of the time and Overbought just 16% of the time.

Narrow the data to 2019 and stocks are GARP just 44% of the time, Overbought 39% of the time. It’s become momentum almost as much as growth.

Zoom on Aug 1-present. GARP behavior is down to 41% of trading, Overbought, 36% of the time, Oversold 23% of the time.

Shouldn’t we be measuring that? By sector, industry, stock? Well. We do, at ModernIR.

Shifting our lens, in the past three weeks across the eleven market sectors, selling has outpaced buying 61% to 39%.

How does money leave stocks while the market sustains GARP or momentum (more Overbought than Oversold) characteristics?

The money behind prices is increasingly short-term, and leveraged. Add up everything that’s not long-only investing and it’s 86% of trading. The AMOUNT of money chasing stocks can shrink and stocks will still rise because the TIME dedicated to buying or selling is increasingly up-or-down, not buy-and hold.

Lesson? Public companies and investors, you cannot count on fundamentals, macroeconomics, central banks, to predict what the market will do. It moves in response to its temporal behavioral biases.

Or put another way, direction hinges on the short-term propensity of money to plow back into stocks tomorrow or to stop doing that.  It shifts to GARP, to growth, to value, and back. When the bias in the data blurs, money falters.

Data are getting blurry (as rock band Puddle of Mudd would say). It’s not a GARP market anymore.

For that reason, I’ll go out on a limb and say it’s too early to call this a record year (like Eric Church, for you country fans).  What got us here has begun eroding. We’re only 1% above the GARP levels for stocks in Q4 2018.

Wrapping up, it’s a great season, this one of Thanksgiving.  Give thanks!  And be alert to changing behaviors.  When lines blur – in your stock, your peers, your sector, industry – you should know. It’s a weather report on what’s coming. We want to stay clear-eyed.

Rotation

There’s a story going around about an epochal rotation from momentum (growth) to value in stocks. It may be a hoax.

I’ll explain in a bit. First the facts. It began Monday when without warning the iShares Edge MSCI USA Value Factor ETF (VLUE) veered dramatically up and away from the iShares Edge MSCI USA Momentum Factor ETF (MTUM).

CNBC said of Monday trading, “Data compiled by Bespoke Investment Group showed this was momentum’s worst daily performance relative to value since its inception in early 2013.”

The story added, “The worst performing stocks of 2019 outperformed on Monday while the year’s biggest advancers lagged, according to SentimenTrader. This year’s worst performers rose 3.5% on Monday while 2019’s biggest advancers slid 1.4%, the research firm said.”

A tweet from SentimenTrader called it “the biggest 1-day momentum shift since 2009.”

It appeared to continue yesterday. We think one stock caused it all.

Our view reflects a theorem we’ve posited before about the unintended consequences of a market crammed full of Exchange Traded Funds, substitutes for stocks that depend for prices on the prices of stocks they’re supposed to track.

To be fair, the data the past week are curious. We sent a note to clients Monday before the open. Excerpt:

“Maybe all the data is about to let loose. It’s just. Strange.  Fast Trading leading. ETFs more volatile than stocks. Spreads evaporating. Sentiment stuck in neutral. More sectors sold than bought….Stocks should rise. But it’s a weird stretch ahead of options-expirations Sep 18-20.  It feels like the market is traversing a causeway.”

That stuff put together could mean rotation, I suppose.

But if there was a massive asset shift from growth to value, we’d see it in behavioral change. We don’t. The only behavior increasing in September so far is Fast Trading – machines exploiting how prices change.

What if it was AT&T and Elliott Management causing it?

If you missed the news, T learned last weekend that Activist investor Elliott Management had acquired a $3.2 billion stake in the communications behemoth and saw a future valuation near $60.  On that word, T surged Monday to a 52-week high.

T is the largest component of the MSCI index the value ETF VLUE tracks, making up about 10% of its value.  ETFs, as I said above, have been more volatile than stocks.

Compare the components of MTUM and VLUE and they’re shades apart. Where T is paired with VLUE, CMCSA ties to MTUM, as does DIS.  MRK is momentum, PFE is value. CSCO momentum, INTC, IBM value. PYPL, V, MA momentum, BAC, C, value.

Look at the market. What stuff did well, which did poorly?

The outlier is T. It’s a colossus among miniatures. It trades 100,000 times daily, a billion dollars of volume, and it’s been 50% short for months, with volatility 50% less than the broad market, and Passive Investment over 20% greater in T than the broad market.

T blasted above $38 Monday on a spectacular lightning bolt of…Fast Trading. The same behavior leading the whole market.  Not investment. No asset-shift.

What if machines, which cannot comprehend what they read like humans can, despite advances in machine-learning, artificial intelligence (no learning or intelligence is possible without human inputs – we’re in this business and we know), improperly “learned” a shift from growth to value solely from T – and spread it like a virus?

Humans may be caught up in the machine frenzy, concluding you gotta be in value now, not realizing there’s almost no difference between growth and value in the subject stocks.

Compare the top ten “holdings” of each ETF. Easy to find. Holdings, by the way, may not reflect what these ETFs own at a given time. Prospectuses offer wide leeway.

But let’s give them the benefit of the doubt. What’s the difference between MRK and PFE? V, MA, and PYPL and C, BAC and, what, GM and DIS?

Stock pickers know the difference, sure.  Machines don’t. Sponsors of ETFs wanting good collateral don’t.  Except, of course, that cheap collateral is better than expensive collateral, because it’s more likely to produce a return.

Such as: All the worst-performing stocks jumped. All the best-performing stocks didn’t.

What if this epochal rotation is nothing more than news of Elliott’s stake in T pushing a domino forward, which dropped onto some algorithm, that tugged a string, which plucked a harp note that caused fast-trading algorithms to buy value and sell momentum?

This is a risk with ETFs. You can’t trust signs of rotation.

We have the data to keep you from being fooled by machine-learning.

Targeting Today

EDITORIAL NOTE: This edition of the Market Structure Map ran nearly a year ago, on May 30, 2012, right ahead of the NIRI National Conference, the IR profession’s annual gathering. We’re at NIRI again now, in sultry south Florida with our professional compatriots conferencing at the Westin Diplomat in Hollywood.  After spending several hours at the ModernIR booth, this still seems apropos. Catch you next week.  -TQ 

“So we should target value investors next week.”

Those eight words say much about IR today. I heard them on a weekly web meeting with a Nasdaq-traded company whose name most everybody knows. The point isn’t who said it. The idea applies to all of us. More in a moment.

First, at NIRI National next week I’m a panelist Monday along with Jason Lenzo, Director of Equity and Fixed-Income Trading at Russell Investments. Russell indices benchmark tomorrow for rebalancing, by the way. Our panel hits market structure and how it affects institutional trading and IR targeting today. Come ask tough questions.

Back to those words. There’s an action in them: Target. An audience: Value investors. A timeframe: Next week.

The kicker: This company is a growth story. What’s wrong with growth stories right now? Well, consider the environment. Yesterday, markets were briefly rattled by the Conference Board’s consumer confidence survey, which dipped more than expected. US stocks were up anyway, but not on growth. Money saw Chinese stimulus, Swiss capital controls to keep the franc from climbing, and rising yields on Spanish and Italian bonds as reasons to buy short-term shelters. US stocks.

Growth stocks, or value stocks?

Exactly.

Next week the situation might be wholly different. A growth story might indeed be a growth stock. Or a GARP stock. Stock and story are not the same, any more than summer and winter clothing at your favorite retailer are hot items simultaneously. Sure, it’s all clothing. But context matters. Got a tough environment? Inventory to move? You’re a value story. (more…)

“We determined that it was appropriate to re-examine the appropriateness of short sale price test restrictions.”

We copied that sentence from the SEC’s 334-page charter instituting Rule 201 amendments for short sales. While it’s amusing that the authors modified the word appropriate with the word appropriateness, what’s important is that the rule took effect yesterday, Feb 28. What is it and how might it impact investor relations?

It’s hard to summarize a document consuming 60% of a ream of paper in one sentence. But Rule 201 implements an uptick rule – which regulators removed as part of Reg NMS in 2007 – when securities drop 10% from the preceding day’s closing price. If that happens, an uptick rule will be enforced in which long sellers matching at the best bid or offer will be able to sell ahead of short-sellers, and shorts will only be able to sell if the price ticks up above the last bid.

The idea is that if long sellers get called up to the front of the line, it’ll promote investor confidence by reducing the severity of short-driven price swings. And it’ll improve market-efficiency by letting those with long positions off the boat, thus discouraging short sellers from trying to sink the boat. (more…)

How Quants Find Value

Prior to the 4th of July you might have heard us jeer, “That’s about as exciting as Iowa.”

Passing through last weekend, we had to concede that Iowa was in fact a place of surpassing and bucolic beauty, with its rolling corn-planted hills and manicured farms. The heartland at Independence Day reminded us that this land of ours and yours is jeweled.

Anyway, we’re a day late this week because it’s a long way from Bratenahl on Erie to the banks of the Platte.

Speaking of eerie, your management teams must be wondering what caused stocks to cross chasms today to the upside. Do you think investors suddenly decided stocks were cheap? To paraphrase Saturday Night Live…really? (more…)