December 31, 2012

Brief Holiday Update

Weekly Market Comment Archive Investment Research & Insight Page

John P. Hussman, Ph.D. All rights reserved and actively enforced.

Reprint Policy

With Monday as the last opportunity for Congress to avoid some version of the fiscal cliff, there isnt a great deal to say that will be relevant for long, but my impression remains that the most likely outcome is that fiscal policy will go over the cliff if only for a week or so. The last Congressional Republican to vote for a tax increase was Pete Domenici in 1990. Whether one agrees with that position on taxes or not, it seems unlikely that House Republicans will violate their pledge to their own constituents and vote to raise taxes on December 31 when precisely the same outcome can be obtained by voting a few days later to lower them immediately after they are automatically raised. The House has already passed legislation that, if passed by the Senate, would avoid the fiscal cliff but wouldnt raise taxes. That clearly isnt acceptable to Democrats. A slightly modified proposal to raise taxes only on incomes above $1 million was pulled before a House vote, because even that tax increase was too objectionable to garner enough votes. So now, theres some talk of the Senate passing a bill and sending it to the House, though this would seem to violate Article I Section 7 of the Constitution, which requires all bills for raising revenue to originate in the House. Then again, the Federal Reserve has repeatedly violated the Federal Reserve Act to encroach on the fiscal authority of the House in recent years (see The Case Against the Fed), so we shouldnt rule out some novel interpretation of the law on this matter as well. In any event, we shouldnt be terribly surprised if we briefly go over the fiscal cliff. The real problem would be if there is significant difficulty in quickly passing legislation in early January, or if Congress merely passes an extension of existing law, which would result in a replay of the current situation since some solution would still be required to avoid the need for the House to explicitly raise taxes. It strikes me that we have more hurdles for the financial markets beyond the fiscal cliff, including unresolved risks out of Europe, a likely but as yet unrecognized recession in the U.S., and continuing weakness in our return/risk estimate for the stock market, driven by a broad syndrome of overvalued, overbought, overbullish conditions. On a positive note, last weeks decline did ease the near-term overbought conditions of the market, and while the employment component of the Chicago purchasing managers survey deteriorated, there was a pickup in the new orders component that was of modest benefit to the coincident/lagging measure I discussed in How To Build a Time Machine. Of course, we also saw a pop in the Chicago new orders component in August 2008, rising from 48.7 to 55.3, before plunging to 29 in the next three months, so one month doesnt make a trend. Still, a series of upticks in Chicago new orders component and the Philadelphia Fed Index (ideally large upward leaps in both) would be among the first places to look for evidence that recessionary evidence is easing. For now, our measures remain negative on the economic front, but were open to new data as conditions change. Though our concerns still weigh heavily toward the defensive side, there are hints of progress toward the resolution of the lopsided market conditions weve seen. Our measures of return/risk have been hard-negative for a year, and dropped into the most negative 1% of the data in March (the S&P 500 was below March levels as of Fridays

close). Based on historical precedents, I dont expect these measures to remain negative much longer, and while the terminal portion of a market cycle is hardly enjoyable for most investors, significant downturns can result in remarkably large shifts in our return/risk estimates. We remain very open to a more constructive investment view as the evidence changes. On the valuation front, our estimates of prospective 10-year S&P 500 total returns have benefited from some amount of growth in fundamentals since March and a slight decline in the S&P 500 Index, resulting in an increase in our 10-year estimate to about 4.7% annually (nominal). Were sometimes asked how interest rates factor into this analysis. On this front, its important to recognize that the prospective return on a security is a function of the cash flows that it can be expected to deliver into the hands of investors over time, compared with the price paid in the present. Interest rates dont actually enter that calculation. Instead, you make the comparison with interest rates after the prospective return on a given security is estimated. Alternatively, you can couple the estimated future cash flows with a required rate of return that reflects whatever beliefs you have about how interest rates affect stock returns, and then discount back to a target price, but that method is often very sensitive to bad assumptions about future rates of return (see the book Dow 36,000 for a good example of this non-robustness). As a rule, analysts like to choose infinite-horizon return estimates that are very close to the infinite-horizon growth rates they estimate for fundamentals a practice that can be used to justify arbitrarily high price targets. We prefer to estimate the expected rate of return taking the current price as a given. So the question then becomes, given that the 10-year Treasury yield is just 1.7%, isnt an estimated 4.7% 10-year total return on stocks good enough? My impression is that though stocks may outperform bonds over a decade, that decade is likely to involve dramatic market losses and recoveries, so there is significant risk in attempting to lock in a 10-year return on stocks. By doing so, one surrenders the significant potential opportunity to accept a higher intervening rate of return at some point where prices are depressed and valuations are more typical. Moreover, as Ive noted frequently over the years, there is not even remotely a one-to-one relationship between 10-year bond yields and 10-year prospective stock returns. Stocks are effectively instruments with a duration of close to 50 years, while a 10-year bond has a fraction of that duration. Regardless of whether we use our 10-year prospective return estimates, or instead use 10-year realized S&P 500 total returns, we find that regressing forward 10-year S&P 500 total returns on the 10-year Treasury yield results in a slope estimate of anywhere between 0.2 and 0.4, depending on the period used, and the correlation itself is less than 0.2, so its a very weak relationship. More importantly, the intercept of that regression is as high as 11% and never materially below 9%. In other words, there is little evidence that prospective 10-year S&P 500 total returns revert around a mean that is materially under 9-11% even at very low interest rates. Thats problematic here, because we estimate that a 10% prospective 10-year total return on the S&P 500 is consistent with a level given present fundamentals such as earnings, dividends, book values, revenues and so forth of about 900 on the S&P 500. Keep in mind, however, that we dont require the market to move to what we view as fair value or undervalue in order to accept a significant exposure to market fluctuations. In general, the best opportunities emerge when reasonable (if not depressed) valuations are coupled with an early strengthening in market internals following a significant market decline. That sort of opportunity has emerged regularly in market cycles over history. Though much larger stress-testing concerns about Depression-era data complicated the 2009-early 2010 instance, the present cycle is also quite long in the tooth, and I doubt that market cycles have been permanently repealed by monetary policy. Among cyclical bull markets in secular bear periods, the current advance at about 45 months in length is second in length only to the 2002-2007 bull market advance (see Hanging Around, Hoping to Get Lucky). On average, these advances have been followed by market declines of about 39% (the average for all bear markets is closer to 32%). Cyclical bear markets in secular bear periods have typically wiped out not just half of the preceding bull market gain which is average but close to 80% of the preceding bull market gain. Its not clear what portion will be surrendered in the present cycle, or necessarily when, but I have every expectation of observing the normal range of full-cycle opportunities as we

I have every expectation of observing the normal range of full-cycle opportunities as we move forward from here.
The foregoing comments represent the general investment analysis and economic views of the Advisor, and are provided solely for the purpose of information, instruction and discourse. Only comments in the Fund Notes section relate specifically to the Hussman Funds and the investment positions of the Funds.

Fund Notes As of last week, our estimates of prospective stock market return/risk remained negative, but last weeks market decline was sufficient to relieve at least the short-term overbought condition of the market. Market internals such as breadth (advances versus declines) and other measures of price dispersion remain mixed, as do the trend-following measures we track, but in the absence of clear further breakdowns in market internals, the easing of overbought conditions was a modestly positive development. Strategic Growth Fund remains fully hedged, with a staggered strike position where a portion of our long put options have strike prices set closer to prevailing market levels. On last weeks easing of overbought conditions, we softened that position modestly and reduced the amount of time premium at risk by lowering strikes on about one-third of that position. The additional time premium in those higher-strike puts is presently about 1.5% of assets looking out to springtime. Overall, the Fund remains in a defensive position, but I am very aware of the discomfort that risk on rallies can produce when we are tightly hedged, and am hopeful for more constructive market conditions. I expect that the additional criteria on staggered-strike positions that we introduced last spring (see the 2012 Annual Report) will reduce the frequency of tightly hedged positions, while preserving much of the benefit that these positions have often provided during severe market declines. The enhancements discussed in the Annual Report effectively address what I view as the key challenges we encountered in this extraordinary cycle. Being confident in how our present methods navigate post-war data, Depression-era data, and even the most recent market cycle, our primary focus is to adhere to our discipline. There's no assurance that we will meet our investment objectives, but we will be content with "as intended" performance, as we observed before the need arose to contemplate and stress-test against Depression-era outcomes. Meanwhile, Strategic International remains fully hedged, Strategic Dividend Value remains hedged at about 50% of the value of its stock holdings, and Strategic Total Return carries a duration of just over 3 years (meaning that a 100 basis point move in interest rates would be expected to impact the Fund by about 3% on the basis of bond price fluctuations), with about 15% of assets in precious metals and just under 5% of assets in utility shares. Happy New Year! Wishing you a wonderful start to 2013. --Prospectuses for the Hussman Strategic Growth Fund, the Hussman Strategic Total Return Fund, the Hussman Strategic International Fund, and the Hussman Strategic Dividend Value Fund, as well as Fund reports and other information, are available by clicking "The Funds" menu button from any page of this website. Estimates of prospective return and risk for equities, bonds, and other financial markets are forward-looking statements based the analysis and reasonable beliefs of Hussman Strategic Advisors. They are not a guarantee of future performance, and are not indicative of the prospective returns of any of the Hussman Funds. Actual returns may differ substantially from the estimates provided. Estimates of prospective long-term returns for the S&P 500 reflect our standard valuation methodology, focusing on the relationship between current market prices and earnings, dividends and other fundamentals, adjusted for variability over the economic cycle (see for example The Likely Range of Market Returns in the Coming Decade and Valuing the S&P 500 Using Forward Operating Earnings ).

Home | The Funds | Open an Account | Account Access | Research & Insight | Site Map

[Open Disclosure in Separate Window] Past performance does not ensure future results, and there is no assurance

[Open Disclosure in Separate Window] Past performance does not ensure future results, and there is no assurance that the Hussman Funds will achieve their investment ob jectives. An investor's shares, when redeemed, may b e worth more or less than their original cost. Current performance may b e higher or lower than the performance quoted ab ove. More current performance data through the most recent month-end is availab le at www.hussmanfunds.com. Investors should consider the investment ob jectives, risks, and charges and expenses of the Funds carefully b efore investing. For this and other information, please ob tain a Prospectus and read it carefully. The Hussman Funds have the ability to vary their exposure to market fluctuations depending on overall market conditions, and they may not track movements in the overall stock and bond markets, particularly over the short-term. While the intent of this strategy is long-term capital appreciation, total return, and protection of capital, the investment return and principal value of each Fund may fluctuate or deviate from overall market returns to a greater degree than other funds that do not employ these strategies. For example, if a Fund has taken a defensive posture and the market advances, the return to investors will be lower than if the portfolio had not been defensive. Alternatively, if a Fund has taken an aggressive posture, a market decline will magnify the Funds investment losses. The Distributor of the
For more information about investing in the Hussman Funds, please call us at

1-800-HUSSMAN (1-800-487-7626)
513-587-3440 outside the United States Site and site contents copyright 2003 Hussman Funds. Brief quotations including attribution and a direct link to this site (w w w .hussmanfunds.com) are authorized. All other rights reserved and actively enforced. Extensive or unattributed reproduction of text or research findings are violations of copyright law . Site design by 1WebsiteDesigners.