Category Archives: Dow Jones Utility Average

Dow Jones Utility Average Price Momentum

Below is a chart of Dow Jones Utility Average, reflecting Price Momentum data.

Continue reading

The Crash of 1929 and the Utility Average

There is much discussion about the stock market crash of 1929.  By default, that discussion centers around the collapse of the Dow Jones Industrial Average (as the S&P 500 didn’t exist at the time) which declined -89% from the 1929 high of 381.17 to the 1932 low of 41.22.

Little discussed is the collapse of the Dow Jones Utility Average. At the peak of the Dow Jones Utility Average, also topping in 1929, the index declined -92.67%. While the decline in the Dow Jones Industrial Average lasted approximately 2 and a half years, the final low in the Dow Jones Utility Average did not materialize until 1942, approximately 11 and a half years later.

image

While on the road to recovery from the 1932 low, the Dow Jones Industrial Average managed to exceed the 1929 peak in late 1954 and never looked back.

image

Meanwhile, The Dow Jones Utility Average has had a different path.  From the 1942 low, The Dow Jones Utility Average did not manage to attain the 1929 high until 1963.  By 1965, the Dow Jones Utility Average achieved a peak and fell to a low of 57.93 in September 1974.

image

Worse still, the Dow Jones Utility Average did not break above the 1929 high for good until 1984, creating the most unparalleled “cup and handle” technical formation.  You would think that the breakout from the 1929 high would be significant enough to not worry about revisiting such a level again.  However, the Dow Jones Utility Average came within 20% of the 1929 peak on October 9, 2002.

image

The decline in the Dow Jones Utility Average is not unlike the decline in the Nikkei 225 Index which peaked in 1989 at 38,876.94 and bottomed in 2003 at 7,607.88 fourteen years later (or at 7,054.98 in 2009 at 20 years after the peak). There is another similarity in the Dow Jones Utility Average and the Nikkei 225 Index.

After the collapse of the Nikkei 225, it was realized that the complex crossholding relationship of publicly traded companies made it difficult to unwind intricated positions in stock of insolvent or illiquid companies.  The complexity of the relationship is illustrated below.

image

Likewise, the Dow Jones Utility Average list of companies, after 1929, had similar cross holding relationships as seen in the illustration below.

image

Highlighted in red is Electric Bond & Share Company.  Below is the Electric Bond & Share Company web of business relationships.

image

In the example below, the violent rise and subsequent collapse in the share price of all publicly traded utilities made it difficult to unwind positions to allow for sale of assets or loans based on secured assets related to the actual business.

image

Electric Bond & Share Company had a share price increase from $45 in 1926 to as high as $475 in 1929.  Only to later fall as low as $1 in 1932.  Surviving such a rapid rise and fall wasn’t something that could have happened without considerable intervention.

Behind most utility companies was General Electric (GE) with outright ownership or majority stakes in the businesses. Ultimately, “orderly” government reorganization of the industry is what allowed General Electric to survive while the unwinding process dragged on for decades in the utility industry.

When there is discussion of the ravages of the stock market crash of 1929, keep in mind this story of the Dow Jones Utility Average.  The decline and recovery is worth your time and consideration.

NextEra Energy: The NextProblem

There is a reason it is called the Dow Jones Utility Average, it reflects what the average “should” be.  However, some members of the average have gone far above what is considered to be reasonable  This leads to only one outcome, reversion to the mean (in the best case scenario). 

On the way to reverting to the mean, many stocks will overshoot the mean as a normal reaction to the extreme that was attained in the prior up or down period.  As we’ve demonstrated with the chart of Boeing (BA) versus the Dow Jones Industrial Average on March 22, 2020, any stocks that has exceeded the average will likely revert to the mean in dramatic fashion.  As seen in the chart provided, NextEra Energy (NEE) will be no exception.

Below is a chart of NextEra Energy versus the Dow Jones Industrial Average from the March 9, 2009 low to March 23, 2020.

image

Our review of NextEra Energy isn’t as wish for the decline in the stock price.  Instead, our work is an observation that has stood the test of time. 

As markets are currently experiencing an exceptional increase of +5% to +7% (abnormal and unhealthy), we’d like to save investors a lot of money so that they can subscribe to our service which will outline the best times to buy NextEra Energy (we already have that price).  At the current price, NextEra Energy (NEE) is in our AVOID range.

Interest Rates and the Dow

The secular trend for interest rates is clearly up after declining since April 1981.

image

There are “experts” on the topic of interest rates and the stock market claiming that the Federal Reserve policy of “artificially low” interest rates is the reason the stock market is up since the low of 2009 and as a supplemental proof of their lack of knowledge, the “experts” include the Dow increase from the 2001-2003 lows as the devil’s handiwork.  These same “experts” also claim that the stock market will crash if rates start to go up.

Yes, stocks can go down as a function of rising rates.  However, this needs to be put in context of the overall market.  As we start to emerge from a secular declining trend, from 1981 to 2008, to a secular rising trend, from 2008 to 2035,  the only comparisons of the current rising trend can only be done to the last secular rising trend from 1942 to 1981.

image

The “experts” claim this time is nothing like the postwar economy that led to the rate peak in 1981.  We’ll have to wait and see, for now the following data stands in opposition of the “experts.” Continue reading

Rates Up, Utilities Down? Nope!

In a Bloomberg article dated March 14, 2018, it cites a prevailing theme about utilities and interest rates.

“The popular ‘buy banks, sell utility stocks’ strategy, built in anticipation of higher interest rates, is unraveling.

“Utilities were the only gainers in the S&P 500 Index on Wednesday, with the industry that’s seen hurt most by rising Treasury yields heading for its longest rally since November. Financial shares, beneficiaries of higher borrowing costs, sank 1.4 percent for a third day of declines.”

image

While this is a small timeframe to measure the performance of any industry, it does shed some light on the popular interpretations about what a rising interest rate cycle will bring to the market.  One of the most pervasive claims is the interest rate sensitive utilities will suffer with the advent of rising interest rates.

As pointed out in our September 4, 2014 article titled “Utility Stocks and Rising Interest Rates”, we said the following:

“Investors anticipating a general rise in interest rates should feel some comfort in knowing that most manager in the utility sector are ready for what is to come.  Rising interest rates are not an automatic death sentence for utility stock prices or earnings.   In fact, the early stages of rising interest rates may see utility stocks match or exceed the returns of non-interest rate sensitive stocks, on a total return basis.  Only when the outlook is cloudy will it become difficult to offer projections that are in line with prior expectations.”

So far the market is in agreement with our long established thesis that utilities do well in the early stages of the secular rise in interest rates.

Continue reading

Bull Market Ranking

Since January 2011, we have advocated against the claim that the Federal Reserve was responsible for the rise in the stock market.  Our theory has always been based on the precedent of stock market data which can be traced to periods in American history when there was no central bank.

In February 2014, we compiled enough of the necessary stock market data to show that:

“The most important concept that should be taken away from all this data is that a central bank did not exist from 1836-1914. There was no way to ascribe the gains of the market to the Federal Reserve. All iterations of a central bank with the First Bank of the United States (1791-1811) and the Second Bank of the United States (1816-1836) did not have any effect on the data sets that we have provided from the period of 1836 to 1914. In order for the claim that the current market run is based on the monetary policies of the Federal Reserve, we’d need to be able to demonstrate that the stock market would have behaved differently without the existence of a Federal Reserve (February 17, 2014).”

In that same February 2014 posting, we listed the market percentage gains that were experienced when there was no central bank in place.  We averaged the gains in the seven market cycles while having no Federal Reserve and showed that the average gain would have brought the Dow Jones Industrial Average to 17,500.  However, as time has passed and the Dow has increased, we’ve shown what the next level the Dow would need to go to in order to exceed the next highest bull market (on a percentage basis).  In November 2014, we said:

“If the Dow were to go to the extreme of rebounds with no Fed (1857-1864), then in theory the index could climb as high as 24,840 (November 2014).”

On December 18, 2017, the Dow Jones Industrial Average increased to the 24,840 level on an intraday basis. The gain from the 6,450 level is approximately +285.11%.  We think that the stock market’s ability to rise to the current level has been more about confidence in the economy and less about actions taken by the Federal Reserve.  Below we show the ranking of the current bull market to put the market action into perspective.

Dow Jones Utility Average Downside Targets

This posting will cover the downside targets for the Dow Jones Utility Average using Edson Gould’s Speed Resistance Lines [SRL].  The point of downside targets is to consider buying at predefined levels when and if those targets are achieved.  If the downside targets are not achieved then we patiently wait and focus our attention on other opportunities.

This posting is a follow up to our August 24, 2013 posting with SRL downside targets for the same index.  As the Utility index has increased above the 2007 peak and now is in a declining trend, we need to update the numbers in case the downside targets are achieved.  Below are the downside targets based on Edson Gould’s Speed Resistance Lines.

Utility Stocks and Rising Interest Rates

Every stock market investor should be concerned about the impact that rising interest rates might have on future investment returns.  The prevailing theory is that when interest rates rise then stock prices should decline due to the impact to earnings from higher borrowing costs.  Since we are at or near the lowest level in interest rates, conventional wisdom suggests that eventually interest rates will rise.

With rising interest rates, investors should expect that stock prices will decline as per share earnings are reduced.  One industry that borrows heavily for going operations is the utility sector (electricity, water, gas etc.).  This article will give a cursory examination of utility stocks from the beginning of a rising interest rate cycle to the peak (1939 to 1980).  We will attempt to determine if the conventional thinking on rising interest rates and their impact on utility stocks is correct.

Dow Theory

On September 30, 2013, we posted our Dow Theory analysis.  In that assessment, we acknowledged that our June 2013 review of Dow Theory was incorrect.  Additionally, we pointed out the importance of using Dow Theory as an asset allocation tool rather that a strict “buy” or “sell” indicator.  A couple of excerpts appear below:

“Since June 21st, as indicated in the chart below, the Dow Industrials and Dow Transports have managed to achieve successive new highs in early August 2013 and mid-September 2013.  In addition, the call for a bear market came slightly before the bottom in the market in late June 2013.”

“In short, we use Dow Theory indications as asset allocation signals rather than strict buy/sell signals.”

Accepting the reality that we were not in a bear market was challenging.  However, realizing it in enough time, along with the fact that Dow Theory is used as an allocation tool, has spared us excessive losses and/or missed opportunities.

Traditional Dow Theory

Recently Dow Theory has registered a confirmation of the bullish trend.  On May 12, 2014, the Dow Jones Industrial Average confirmed the new highs in the Dow Jones Transportation Average.  In fact, on the same day, both indexes made new all-time highs.

image

That this is still a bull market requires a review of various factors that could be at play, both positive and negative.  As an example, already the Dow Jones Industrial Average has increased +151% since the March 9, 2009 low.  The amount of the increase is less than the average for the period of 1836 to 1914, a time when the Federal Reserve never existed.  As stated in the article titled “Is the Fed Responsible for the Stock Market Rise Since 2009?” the average increase when the Federal Reserve didn’t exist was +167%.  This suggests that the current rise may have some room to go on the upside.

Dow Theory Reconsidered

There are many who follow the traditional Dow Theory which is really a refined version of William Peter Hamilton’s writings from his Wall Street Journal and Barron’s newspaper columns as well as his book Stock Market Barometer.  The theory itself is generally sound.  More often than not it is the interpreter of the theory that gets it wrong.  However, we can’t help but feel it necessary to point out the specific words of Charles H. Dow which possibly leads to a market theory slightly different from what the legions of modern Dow Theorists are willing to accept.

The following excerpts from the Wall Street Journal outline Dow’s theory on the role of the industrials as it originally was stated:

“This is preeminently the period of industrial speculation, yet the creation of industrial stocks has become pronounced only within a year.”

“…it follows that there must be a very strong body of [venture] capitalists prepared at present to resist anything like a collapse in the industrial market and to promote by every means in their power firm or advancing prices for the market as a whole.  and this effort on their part is being powerfully supported by the excellent conditions of practically all branches of trade.”

Dow, Charles H. Review and Outlook. Wall Street Journal. April 22, 1899.

Our interpretation of the preceding quotes is that industrial stocks were, in 1899, considered to be the equivalent to modern small cap stocks which are more speculative in nature and often prone to manipulation and collapse.  The best confirmation of this concept is found in the following New York Times quote:

“Our London correspondent, in yesterday’s Financial Supplement, gave expression to the feeling which the English investor or speculator very naturally has as to the securities that usually go under the title of industrials in our markets.  It is one of distrust and hesitation.  It would be very strange if it were not.

“As to the investor, we suppose that no one on this side of the water would claim that our industrials, taking them ‘by and large,’ the older with the new, the more solid with the more inflated, can be regarded as ‘investment’ securities.”

New York Times. “The Industrials and The Boom”. March 14, 1899. page 6.

By most measures, the New York Times article, from one month earlier in 1899, confirms our view that industrial stocks were of low quality.  Now we need to see what Dow intended for the role of transportation and industrial stocks.

“…railway [transportation] stocks generally occupy a position much stronger than that held by the industrials.”

“The growth of the business of the country accrues on the old stocks [transportation stocks].  The Industrial list occupies an entirely different position.  There has been a very large creation of securities [initial public offerings].  Stocks have been bought on very limited information as to the value of the property acquired.  Attack of these stocks brings selling from those who know little in regard to the worth of what they have bought; also from those who got in at low figures [company insiders] and who propose to get out as well as they can.  This is the ideal condition for bear attacks, checked only by the possibility of not being able to borrow stock [for short selling].  The thoughtfulness of promoters [investment banks] in providing ample capital relieves this danger to great extent and will relieve it altogether when the new Industrials come to be distributed.”

Dow, Charles H. Review and Outlook.  Wall Street Journal. May 31, 1899.

Our views is that Dow’s theory was intended to be based on blue chip high quality stocks to be compared against small cap speculative stocks.  At the time, railroad stocks were the “old stocks” that had a blue chip status while the industrials were the newer [non-railroad] more speculative stocks.  We no longer live in a world where railroad stocks dominate the landscape of companies to invest in. Also, transportation stocks generally don’t provide consistent and/or rising dividend payments as was the case of railroad stocks in the last quarter of the 1800’s.

What would be the equivalent indexes of Dow’s comparison between old blue chip stocks to newer more speculative stocks? We believe that the Dow Jones Industrial Average qualifies as the blue chip barometer and the Russell 2000 small cap index qualifies as the speculative barometer.  Using all of the other elements of Dow Theory except for the Dow Jones Transportation Average, we believe that we would be following Dow’s theory exactly as it was intended.

Just to reiterate, Dow was not specifically concerned with the comparison between industrial stocks because they made the goods and transportation stocks because they shipped those same goods, a popular and logical story that is expounded on what Dow had intended.  However, based on the quotes above, we believe Dow was comparing companies of older blue chip quality that were well established and could be relied upon for their dividends in contrast to newer companies with little in the way of verifiable earnings, nascent but unstable dividends and highly susceptible to manipulation (i.e. small illiquid stock).

If we look at a comparison between the Industrials and the Russell 2000 index, the picture is very different from the confirmation of the bullish trend in the review of the transportation and industrial index above.

image

As can be seen above, while the Dow Industrials has managed to exceed the previous peaks of December 2013 and April 2014, the Russell 2000 has not been able to exceed the peak of March 2014.  Under the rules of Dow Theory, this would be considered a non-confirmation of the rising trend.  However, this does not signal a new bear market.  Instead, it only suggests that investors remain cautious about new investments.

A bear market would be signaled if the Dow Industrials and Russell 2000 were to simultaneously decline below the previous retracement levels during the rise from the March 2009 low to the current market levels.  In the chart above, the initial warning would come if the Russell 2000 and Dow Industrials declined below their respective February 2014 lows.

Dow Jones Utility Average Downside Targets

As the Dow Jones Industrial Average and Dow Jones Transportation Average have achieved highs above their respective 2007 peaks, the Dow Jones Utility Average has not fared as well.  In fact, the Utility Average has been in a declining trend since April 2013.

Continue reading