Category Archives: Edson Gould

DJIA: Downside Targets

Based on the nature of the decline in the market on February 2, 2018, it is worth examining the downside targets for the Dow Jones Industrial Average (DJIA).  Below are the downside targets based on the work of Edson Gould’s Speed Resistance Lines.

Bitcoin: February 1, 2018

On December 22, 2017, we said the following of Bitcoin:

  • “We believe that there is going to be limited upside in the near term.”
  • “We think that the conservative downside target ($6,884.31) will be achieved before a new high is seen.”
  • “In all prior booms, the subsequent bust AVERAGED –70% (data found here).”

Below is the updated chart for Bitcoin along with our expected downside target.

GE Altimeter

Below is the historical range of the Altimeter for General Electric (GE) from 1962 to the present.  The green line represents the mean, which sits at the 143.5 level.  If GE were to achieve the historical high of the range then the stock would be priced at $22.44.  That would be a +37.84% increase to the all-time high of the longstanding range.  Meanwhile, the downside risk, based on the Altimeter, is $11.76 or a decline of –27.76%.  A declining stock price with a rising Altimeter is not a good sign.

image

Mercury General: Targets and Perspective

On August 14, 2012, when Mercury General (MCY) was trading at a price of $37.30, we said the following:

According to Morningstar.com, MCY is considered a “buy” at $31 and at fair value at $45.  Our own model suggests that MCY is significantly undervalued at $39 and a “buy” at $45. Investment Quality Trends (www.iqtrends.com) indicates that when MCY is at a yield of 4.5% or higher, the stock should be considered for purchase.  Currently, MCY has a dividend yield of approximately 6.60%.  Keep in mind that we do not buy stocks for their dividend yield.  Instead, we use the company’s consistently increasing dividend as the only proof that the company management can:

  • increase earnings over time
  • reward current shareholders

Since that time, we’ve seen Mercury General increase from $37.30 to as high as $64.52.  Along with the increase in price, we’ve been forced to revise our perspective on the stock.  Below, we will outline the revisions to our perspective and provide target prices we think MCY should be considered for acquisition.

Review: Western Digital SRL

On November 25, 2015, we posted the following SRL for Western Digital (WDC):

image

Implied in the posting is that WDC would decline, at minimum, to the $49.70 level with the potential of going all the way to the $37.45 level.  Falling below the extreme downside target ($37.45) is where we always recommended consideration of the fundamentals of a stock for a potential purchase. Below is the updated price action for WDC.

image

Much of the price action of WDC has conformed to the SRL which, from our experience, has been amazing in calling downside targets.  The current price action suggests considerable weakness in the stock if WDC cannot maintain the ascending $61.16 level.

Dow Altimeter Review

On October 25, 2017, we said of the Dow Jones Industrial Average Altimeter:

“How in the world do we believe that an already ‘overvalued’ market can possibly go as high as 34,885?  We don’t believe it at all, instead, we’re going by the precedent of the extensive history of the stock market in the United States.”

So far, the Dow has exceed the percentage increase of the 1852 low of +284% when it went above 24,844.60 level.  Now, the Altimeter is pointing to the next upside target of least resistance en route to the 34,885 level.

The Rise and Fall of GE

General Electric (GE) appears to be spiraling into oblivion.  As we’ve suggested last year, we think that GE is going to be booted from the Dow Jones Industrial Average (DJIA).  In this article, we’ll take a look at how GE got to this point and what might be in store for the stock price going forward.

1975-1981

It is possible that the beginning of the end for GE could have been marked by the acquisition of Utah International on December 16, 1976, in a deal that was dubbed “one of the largest acquisition proposals in the nation’s history.”  That transaction set in motion the machinations of a complex set of accounting deals and dealings from which GE never seemed to extract itself from.

In the bid to acquire Utah International, General Electric, “…was able to use the pooling method [of accounting] to help boost its profits…” For GE, the “…unrecorded asset value would be reported as a gain…” when the eventual sale of those assets came due.  Another benefit for GE would be that “…even if the assets were not later sold, their below market valuation allowed GE to understate its expenses (cost of sales and depreciation) and thereby overstate net income.”  The problem with these methods of accounting slight-of-hand is that GE would not be able to wean itself from these strategies.  In fact, this approach to acquisition and growth only increases as time went on.

Alarmingly, the acquisition of Utah International came after GE had exited the computer business.  As noted at the time, “the computer business proved too much for Fred Borch [GE Chairman & CEO, 1967-1972].  Reg Jones [GE Chairman & CEO 1972-1981] made his mark getting us out of it. Will someone have to bail him [Reginald Jones] out of Utah International?”  The combined Borch and Jones years are compared to the period from 2003-2018 during the tenure of Jeff Immelt in the chart below (using the approximate number of trading days going backward from January 19, 2018).

image

The entrance into the computer business followed by the entry into the mining business was simply one failure after the other.  Adding insult to injury is the fact that the period from 1967 to 1981 was a confirmed secular bear market for stocks.  However, the Utah International failure introduced the rampant and widespread use of creative accounting which would augment Jack Welch’s [GE Chairman & CEO 1981-2001] tenure during a secular bull market that began when the Dow Jones Industrial Average was trading at the 1,000 level and peaked at above 11,000.

1981-2001

Below is the stock price of GE during the Jack Welch years from 1981 to 2001 which coincided with a secular bull market in the same period of time.

image

The nature of secular bull markets often see company fundamentals improve and hopefully the stock price will follow.  As shown above, the price of GE increased more than 45 times in the period from 1981 to 2000.  However, when looking at the per share reported earnings, as provided by Value Line Investment Survey from 1982, we can see that earnings “only” increased a little less than 8 times.

image

While fundamentals, stock price, and market sentiment often coincide there is no rule that the stock price has to match the fundamentals in any way, shape, or form.  However, seeing an “industrial” company’s stock price out-distance the reported earnings by such a wide margin suggests that the stock price might gravitate towards a more “realistic” mean eventually.  The perfect setup for this reversion to the mean is a secular bear market, which in our view began in 2000 to 2016 period.

It could seem that choosing the year 2000 as the beginning of secular bear market is arbitrary, at best.  However, as noted before, the well established stock market secular cycles and Warren Buffett’s November 1999 commentary of below average market performance for the 2000 to 2016 period is enough to convince us that the period in question isn’t random.

2001-2018

This leads us to the Jeff Immelt era as Chairman & CEO of General Electric from 2001 to 2017.  There could not have been a worse period to be in charge of a hobbling industrial giant that is hamstrung with well entrenched accounting methods that work against the company when the stock price isn’t in a rising trend.

Remember, when Immelt took over at GE as Chairman & CEO on September 7, 2001, the stock price was already in the beginning stages of collapse after having fallen –34% up to that point.  Even of the price of GE were to trade in range it would be bad news for the company.  A falling stock price spelled disaster for investors who were hoping and expecting a rebound to the prior highs.

image

Many GE investors attribute the decline of GE’s stock price to the management practices of Jeff Immelt.  However, much of this view is simply the mistaken attribution of correlation as causation.

If Warren Buffett thought, in late 1999, that we’d be lucky to see average market returns of +4% and GE fundamentals are calibrated to do better when the stock price rises then there is no evidence to suggest that Immelt did anything that was materially harmful (actual inflation adjusted CAGR of the S&P 500 return was +2.27%).  Instead, what we’ve witnessed in GE stock price has been a reversion to the mean from the prior period of excess.

Price & Time Targets

Based on Edson Gould’s “Three Step” rule, GE has one more leg down.  In theory, this should bring the GE stock price below the 2009 low.  However, there is a lot of ground to cover for GE to get to the 2009 low and there is no guarantee that it will happen.  With this in mind, we’ll outline the previous two declines, 2000-2002 & 2007-2009, to establish any possible precedent that might emerge.

  • 2000-2002
    • The decline from the 2000 peak did not see any respite until 2002.  That decline saw General Electric fall –63%.  The period of decline lasted 530 trading days.
  • 2007-2009
    • The decline from the 2007 peak ended in early 2009 and was approximately –84%.  The period of decline lasted 359 trading days.
  • 2016-present
    • So far, the price of General Electric (GE) has declined approximately –50.62% and has lasted 381 trading days.  As seen in the chart below, GE has blasted through Gould’s Speed Resistance Lines at $25.66 and $18.32.

image

From what we can tell, the price target at the ascending $10.97 level is a lock (approximately $12.18).  This would match the decline that was experienced by GE in the period from 2000-2002.  The question becomes, will GE match the decline of 2007-2009, on a percentage basis.  If so, then GE would decline to as low as $5.27.  This would fit exactly with the nature and pattern of declines expressed by Gould in his “Three Step” rule.

Time targets seem to indicated that General Electric will reach the $10.97 or $5.27 low on April 20, 2018.  The speed at which the current decline is taking place indicates that sentiment will push the stock to the $5.27 price and the elimination from the Dow Jones Industrial Average is eminent.  We see the possible replacements for General Electric in the Dow Jones Industrial Average (DJIA) to be Adobe (ADBE), Expedia (EXPE), Google (GOOG) or Amazon (AMZN).  In the case of Google and Amazon, their inclusion into the DJIA is predicated on a 10:1 stock split.

sources:

  • Stuart, Reginald. $1.9 Billion G.E. Bid in Mining Merger. New York Times. December 16, 1975. page 1.
  • Smith, Gene. Acquisition Set Today of Utah International. New York Times. December 20, 1976. page 67.
  • Schilit, Howard. Financial Shenanigans,2nd edition. McGraw Hill. 2002. page 103.
  • Value Line Investment Survey. General Electric. 1982-2018.

Duke Energy: Downside and Time Targets

We’re very fascinated by the recent price activity of Duke Energy (DUK) and have decided to outline our thoughts on the downside targets that may exist for the stock.  Below we have applied Dow Theory and Gould’s Speed Resistance Lines for what we believe to be conservative estimates that may help investors avoid buying high, allow for buying low, or reduce loses.

Dow Theory says that investors should always refer back to the last time a given stock had performed the worst, on a fundamental basis, as the benchmark for estimating the prospects for going forward. 

"The point of importance for those who deal in industrial stocks is whether the capitalization of the companies into which they propose to buy is moderate or excessive, when compared with the aggregate earnings of the various concerns forming the combination in a period of depression. It is probable that consolidated companies will be able to earn as much in the next period of low prices as the companies forming the combine were able to earn in the last one; hence the very foundation of investments in industrials should be knowledge of what these companies earned, say in 1893 to 1896, making, perhaps, reasonable allowances for economies under consolidation. Where the earnings so shown would have provided dividends for industrials now active, the fact must be regarded as a very strong point in favor of those stocks (George W. Bishop Jr., Charles H. Dow: Economist, Dow-Jones & Company,Princeton, 1967, page 11.)"

If price action is a forward reflection of company fundamentals and investor sentiment, then the period from the 2003 low is the best starting point for our review.  The decline in DUK from the 2001 peak to the 2003 low was the worst decline in magnitude when the stock fell more than -70%.  We’re not suggesting that DUK will fall by that much this time, instead, we’re watching for the intermediate stages that lead up to a possible –70% decline.

Continue reading

Bitcoin: January 2018

On December 22, 2017, we said the following of Bitcoin:

  • “We believe that there is going to be limited upside in the near term.”
  • “We think that the conservative downside target ($6,884.31) will be achieved before a new high is seen.”
  • “In all prior booms, the subsequent bust AVERAGED –70% (data found here).”

Below is an updated review of Bitcoin and our thoughts for the price going forward.

Aflac Inc.: Downside Price and Timing Targets

On January 11, 2018, in an article titled “Behind the Duck: Former Aflac Employees Allege Fraud and Abuse in Nearly Every Aspect of Company” published by The Intercept, it is alleged that Aflac (AFL) “…has exploited workers, manipulated its accounting, and deceived shareholders and customers, according to nine former employees.”

image

These allegations have had a material impact on the stock price of Aflac on January 12, 2018.  Currently, the stock is down –7% on the day.  Below are the downside price and timing targets of AFL based on the Speed Resistance Lines since the 2009 low.

Stock Market and Inflation Risk

A reader of our Dow 130k article has raised an important question about the risks that the stock market faces when confronted with the prospect of rising interest rates.  The reader says, in part:

“…they say that interest rates are mean reverting and based on where we are today (historically low) I would think that the betting man would bet that it can only go up from here.  If that is the case, I can't see a bull market in the coming years.

“What if the scenario is that we have permanent low inflation (Secular stagnation). Productivity improvements through outsourcing and technology innovation may explain this paradigm shift.”

We don’t have much to go by other than the historical record.  In this case, the historical record says the following:

  • Interest rates will go up
  • Inflation is broadly bullish for the stock market
  • the period of “low inflation” is behind us

In this article, we will examine, from a historical perspective, whether this is a new era where all of our claims are false or history will repeat.

Continue reading

Dow 130,000 by 2032

Summary

  • In 1999, Warren Buffett said that stock market returns would underperform over the next 17 years.
  • Cycles indicate that the next 17 years will be a secular bull market.
  • Volume data and price recovery were the keys to the change in the trend.
  • Magnitude of secular trends in the past point to 10-fold gains in DJIA.
  • The work of Edson Gould in 1935, 1979 and today.
  • Look for average real compounded annual returns of +12% v. the historical +7% real returns.

Synopsys Downside Targets

Since the beginning of the bull market in 2009, Synopsys Inc. (SNPS) is a stock that has perform in line with the Nasdaq Composite Index until early 2016.  Since February 2016, SNPS has accelerated well outside of the historical trend for the stock.  While there are many fundamental reasons for excessive gains in the last two years, the gains are still excessive and therefore should, at minimum, revert to the mean. 

image

The challenge with reversion to the mean is that the stock price will likely overshoot on the downside.  With this in mind we have provided the Speed Resistance Lines indicating the conservative, mid range, and extreme price targets below.

Equifax: Downside Targets

Equifax is on a tear, to the downside.  Let’s see what happened to the stock in the last decline from an all-time high and see if there is any precedence for what we can expect going forward.

2002-2009

In the period from 2002 to 2009, the price of Equifax (EFX) increased +158% to a high of $41.22.  the decline that followed brought the stock to $17.80.

image

Equifax fell to the conservative downside target ($34.18) and the mid range downside target ($23.96).  At the time, Equifax had an extreme downside target of ($13.74) but somehow didn’t manage to decline to that level, in spite of the fact that the housing crisis was co-opted by credit bureaus changing their standards which materially affected FICO scores.

“…the higher the credit score, the larger the increase in serious delinquency rates between 2005, 2006 and 2007. For example, for borrowers with the lowest credit scores (FICO scores between 500 and 600), the serious delinquency rate in 2007 was twice as large as in 2005—an increase of nearly 100 percent over the two years. For borrowers with the highest credit scores (FICO scores above 700), the serious delinquency rate in 2007 was almost four times as large as in 2005—an increase of nearly 300 percent. In addition, the serious delinquency rate in 2007 for the best-FICO group was almost the same as the rate in 2005 for the worst-FICO group.(Demyanyk, Yuliya. ‘Did Credit Scores Predict the Subprime Crisis?’ . Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis. October 2008. link.).”

Bending of rules towards what was considered a prime rated credit score contributed significantly to lenders justifying the approval of home loans which later failed.  With all this in mind, Equifax and their competitors should have fallen much more than they did.  In fact, under normal conditions, at least one of the leading credit bureaus should have gone out of business.

Now, Equifax has declined based on a recent hack of their data systems.  The resultant decline in the stock price seems natural.  However, given the resilience  of the stock price after the housing crisis, we have to default to the view that the company won’t go out of business but will be severely impacted in the short-term.

Continue reading

Activision Blizzard: Downside Targets

Review

The following is the pattern of price appreciation and decline for Activision Blizzard (ATVI) from 1993 to 2017 with the application of Speed Resistance Lines [SRL].

1993 to 1996

image

In the period from 1993 to 1996, we can see that Activision Blizzard (ATVI) increase from $0.27 to as high as $1.50 or a gain of +455%.  The decline that followed saw ATVI fall –58%, achieving the conservative downside target of $0.80 and the mid range downside target of $0.65.  Although the chart doesn’t show it, ATVI did not rises above the 1995 level and subsequently fell as low as $0.43 by 2000 and ultimately achieving the extreme downside target of $0.50 in the process.

1999 to 2003

image

In the period from 1999 to 2003, ATVI rose from $0.43 to as high as $3.96, a gain of +821%.  The resulting decline saw ATVI drop –63%.  In the chart above we do note a possible scenario that the SRL is run on the stock at the $3.12 peak, assuming you don’t know where the ultimate peak would be.  In such an instance, a conservative downside target of $1.83 and a mid range target of $1.44 were calculated. 

In the big scheme of things, the conservative downside target was achieved and the mid range target was one penny short of the mark in 2002. The point of this exercise is to see, what would have been the outcome if there was an error in the timing of the calculation of the downside targets.  As we shall see, these situations are all too real with outcomes that are generally surprising. However, in the immediate decline after the $3.12 price peak, the conservative downside target of $1.83 was $0.02 cents short of the $1.85 low set in September 2001.

2002 to 2009

image

In the period from 2002 to 2009, ATVI increased in price by +1,084%.  The decline that followed brought the stock down as much as –56% before a recovery ensued.  Again, we have marked off the points where an error of early use of the SRL could have been applied.  In each of the three examples, the conservative downside target was achieved.  Suffice to say, in the case of the SRL and price peaks, the conservative downside target is a reasonable point of reference for consideration of ATVI.

2012 to 2017

The price action of ATVI has seen the stock price increase from a 2012 low of $10.08 to the 2017 high of $66.16.  The gain in the stock price has been +556%.  Our SRL has the following downside targets: