Category Archives: re-rank review

1929-1932 Decline Largely Impacted by Index Changes

As originally published on April 22, 2009 at SeekingAlpha & DividendInc

After considerable pondering on the subject, I have come to the conclusion that the 89% decline in the Dow Industrials from 1929 to 1932 had little to do with the economic state of the nation. In fact, a simpler explanation lies behind the cause of the decline in the Dow which was thankfully never repeated since. A good portion of the blame should rest squarely on the shoulders of Dow Jones, now a subsidiary of News Corp. (NWS).

First, this is not an article to explain away the various levels of overvaluation in the market of 1929. It was clear then, as it is clear now, that the stock market was extremely overvalued. Also, the explanation that follows isn't the only reason for the decline of '29 to '32. We all know that various economic and political events pushed our economy and stock market to the known limits in the shortest period of time. In this article, I'm trying to point out or explain the reason for the extent of the decline in the stock market. I am hopeful that readers of this article will be open to a "different" perspective on this reasonably unique period which might broaden the minds of the reader rather than convince the reader to buy or sell their stocks.

As a person who tries to examine the Dow Jones Industrial Average from every angle, I have often wondered what the impact of the changes to the index would be if the changes to the index were never made. For example, where would the index be if AIG wasn't added to the index on April 2004? How about if Bank of America (BAC) was never part of the index? Bank of America was added to the Dow on February 2008. What about if Microsoft (MSFT), Intel (INTC), and Home Depot (HD) weren't added to the index in November of 1999? Where would we be if Citigroup (C) and Hewlett-Packard (HPQ) weren't added to the index in March 1997.

These questions have significant bearing on why the index has fallen so much in the last year and a half. It is worth noting that the selection of these stocks were at or near the peak in the respective industry groups that these companies are members. As an example, when Bank of America was added to the index in 2008 it replaced Altria (MO) and/or Honeywell (HON). Both of these companies, when compared to BAC, fared much better in the time after being taken out of the index. In fact, Kraft (KFT), a successful spinoff of MO when it was taken out of the index, was added back into the index on September 22, 2008 replacing AIG. Unfortunately, once KFT was added to the index it promptly fell from its relatively high price of $34.97 to the current level of $22.55.

The decision to take AIG out of the index and put KFT into the index couldn't have happened at a worse time. After all, the Dow Jones Industrial Average is a price weighted index. This means that the higher the stock price, the greater the impact the stock would have on the overall movement of the index. Essentially, the people at Dow-Jones traded a low priced stock with little impact on the index for a high priced stock that was susceptible to falling during a crummy economy. Furthermore, by choosing KFT, Dow-Jones ensured that the index would fall further because high quality stocks like KFT are the last to go when the market hits the skids. And so, KFT promptly fell 33% after being added to the index. Being a relatively high priced stock in the index, KFT had a much more significant impact on the Dow Industrials than the 90% decline in AIG over the same period.

Effectively, what I am describing is a "buy high and sell low" strategy that Dow-Jones exhibited in recent years. Which got me wondering, how did they manage during the "Great" Crash of 1929? Well, the results were what I would consider to be astonishing. The untimely inclusion of companies like KFT, C, HPQ, INTC, MSFT, AIG, BAC and HD were nothing new. However, what was unique about the period of 1929 to 1932 was the number of changes to the index that took place in such a short period of time. A total of 18 companies were taken in and taken out of the Dow.

Never before and never since has the Dow had so many companies added and dropped as constituents of the index. The only other period that came close was the period from 1899 to 1901, when the index had 9 companies added and dropped from the index. As demonstrated earlier, the timing of the selections were not the most optimal. As one company was added at a relatively high price the outgoing company with a low price, which would have had little impact on the downside, was given the boot. This resulted in a vicious cycle which propelled the index much lower than was otherwise necessary.

I contrasted the period of 1929 to 1932 with other known bear markets like 1906 to 1924, when the Dow languished around the 100 level, and the period from 1966 to 1982, when the Dow traded at or below 1000. In each case, the number of changes to the index was marginal, at best. The 18 year period from 1906 to 1924 had only 13 changes or 1.38 changes per year. The 16 year period from 1966 to 1982 had only 4 changes or 0.25 changes per year. This is contrasted with the 1929 to 1932 period which had 6 changes per year.

If looked at from the perspective that Dow-Jones is always going to "buy high and sell low" then we can reasonably assume that much of the decline in the Dow from 1929 to 1932 was due primarily to the constant changes to the index. Frequent changes to the index causes "the market" to grope about for a bottom (no pun intended) that doesn't exist. It appears that Dow-Jones learned the lesson that "buy and hold" works better than trading in and out. However, the timing of their changes to the index has caused more pain to last much longer than if they just let sleeping dogs lie.

See also:

Apple Addition to Dow: Unwise and Untimely

On September 24, 2015, we said the following:

“The outperformance of stocks dropped from an index is not as unusual as it would seem.  Typically, index managers tend to drop stocks that appear weak in price performance and going through a transition to resolve the internal issues contributing to their weakness.  At the same time, stocks that are added to an index just coming off a period of exceptional growth and are about to experience a readjustment period resulting in a decline in their stock price.  The result is stocks being added to the index will adjust lower in price while the timing of the companies dropped from the index coincides with a resurgence in earnings surprises and increased stock price.”

So far the conundrum continues as more than one year later the addition of Apple (AAPL) to the Dow Jones Industrial Average has resulted in a decline of –24%.  At the same time, the stock that Apple replaced, AT&T (T), has increased by +16%.

image

Nasdaq 100: 2014 Re-Rank Review

On December 12, 2014, the Nasdaq OMX Group announced the names of the companies that would be added and dropped from the Nasdaq 100 Index.  The following  are the companies that have been added and dropped from the index:

Symbol Name Price P/E EPS Yield Price/Book Action
EA Electronic Arts Inc. 47.24 38.31 1.23 - 5.38 added
AAL American Airlines 50.14 97.93 0.51 0.8 7.04 added
LRCX Lam Research 80.82 20.68 3.91 0.9 2.55 added
FFIV F5 Networks, Inc. 132.84 32.48 4.09 - 6.96 dropped
EXPE Expedia Inc. 87.79 27.59 3.18 0.8 5.83 dropped
MXIM Maxim Integrated 31.2 25.57 1.22 3.7 3.61 dropped

Continue reading

Nasdaq 100: 2013 Re-Rank Review

Continue reading

Netflix Added to the Nasdaq 100…Again

We have always maintained that those who administer the composition of stock indexes such as the S&P 500, Dow Jones Industrial Average, Nasdaq Composite do so in the fashion of rank speculators. As further proof, it was announced that Netflix will be re-introduced to the Nasdaq 100 Index (found here).  Below is the charting of Netflix being added and dropped from the Nasdaq 100 Index:

image

In our article titled “Virgin Media Gets and Offer and Other Important Lessons” we said:

“Look for Netflix (NFLX) to be one of the two stocks added to the Nasdaq 100 index as the stock is twice the price that it was when it was booted from the Nasdaq 100 Index in December 2012, less than two months ago.”

In our article titled “Nasdaq 100: 2012 Re-Rank Review”, regarding the 2011 changes to the index, we said:

“As was the case in previous changes to the Nasdaq 100, the stocks that were added could not exceed the returns of the stocks that were dropped from the index.”

Also regarding the 2010 changes, we said:

“In the middle of a bull market run, the stocks that were added to the Nasdaq 100 Index on December 20, 2010 (found here) have underperformed by a wide margin when compared to the Nasdaq 100 over the last 2 years.”

Finally adding:

“However, as we've indicated with the Dow Industrials in the past (found here and here), being added to an index usually occurs when a stock has already seen its best performance and is far likelier to decline than rise over the medium term (1-3 year period).”

The Nasdaq 100 and the Nasdaq Composite Index are not below their respective 1999 peaks because the companies in the index haven’t rebounded.  Instead, as we’ve demonstrated regarding the Dow Industrials from 1929 to 1954, the indexes are below the 1999 peak because the selection of stocks to be added to the index at their high price and popularity instead of near their low price and solid valuations.

image

Nasdaq 100: 2012 Re-Rank Review

On December 14, 2012, the Nasdaq OMX Group announced the names of the companies that would be added and dropped from the Nasdaq 100 Index (found here). This year there were ten companies added and dropped.

The ten companies added in 2012 were:

Symbol Name Price P/E EPS Yield P/B % from low
ADI Analog Devices, Inc. 41.35 19.41 2.13 2.9 3 23.88%
CTRX Catamaran Corporation 49.2 72.04 0.68 - 2.21 77.23%
DISCA Discovery Communications, Inc. 60.82 22.23 2.74 - 3.54 54.64%
EQIX Equinix, Inc. 198.56 81.21 2.44 - 4.28 102.01%
LBTYA Liberty Global Inc. 60.31 74.64 0.81 - 5.58 55.84%
LMCA Liberty Media Corporation 110.5 7.65 14.45 - 2.03 49.14%
REGN Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc. 179.71 83.39 2.16 - 21.11 242.63%
SBAC SBA Communications Corp. 69.62 - -1.36 - 19.09 76.79%
VRSK Verisk Analytics, Inc. 48.84 26.97 1.81 - 57.62 27.06%
WDC Western Digital Corporation 37.78 4.97 7.6 2.6 1.14 33.45%

Another company that was added to the Nasdaq 100 Index was Facebook (FB). FB is acting as a replacement to the departure of Infosys (INFY) (WSJ article here) which is jumping ship from being a Nasdaq-listed company to a New York Stock Exchange-listed company.

The ten companies dropped in 2012 were:

Symbol Name Price P/E EPS Yield P/B % from low
APOL Apollo Group Inc. 21.02 6.05 3.48 - 2.59 14.49%
EA Electronic Arts Inc. 15.3 332.61 0.05 - 2.21 42.06%
FLEX Flextronics International Ltd. 6.09 8.3 0.73 - 1.65 11.33%
GMCR Green Mountain Coffee Roasters Inc. 40.32 17.68 2.28 - 2.7 135.65%
LRCX Lam Research Corporation 36.37 50.51 0.72 - 1.27 16.68%
MRVL Marvell Technology Group Ltd. 8.21 14.06 0.58 2.9 0.95 16.45%
NFLX Netflix, Inc. 93.3 120.39 0.78 - 7.17 76.67%
RIMM Research In Motion Limited 14.04 0 -1.17 - 0.76 125.72%
VRSN VeriSign, Inc. 35.9 21.92 1.64 0 -209.82 9.42%
WCRX Warner Chilcott plc 11.7 8.01 1.46 4.6 -4.14 7.83%

Apollo Group (APOL) is finally be dropped after we were certain that it would be eliminated in the 2010 re-ranking (November 26, 2010 article here).  Not being booted from the index meant an increase in price of over +60% from Dec. 2010 to Jan. 2012.  Unfortunately, because the stock was in a rising trend for all of 2011, probably due to not getting dropped in late 2010, the stock has decline –39% from the Nov. 26, 2010 article and –63% from the Jan. 2012 high.

There are many analysts that think the Nasdaq Composite and Nasdaq 100 have a lot of upside potential since the previous highs were 4,900 and 4,600, respectively.  Unfortunately, with the constant addition and subtraction of companies in the index, the Nasdaq Composite and top 100 may be mired at the current levels for some time to come. 

We have outlined our thesis on the negative impact of adding and deleting companies to an index in our article titled “Dow Jones' Decline Largely Impacted by Index Changes.”  We believe that this explains why the decline from 1929-32 was so deep and the subsequent rise to break even from 1932-54 took so long (article here).  This was followed up with our article that highlighted the fact that recovery from the 1932 low was much quicker than the Dow Jones Industrial Index reflected in an article titled “Recovery From 1929 Crash Was Quicker Than Most People Think” (found here).  A similar phenomenon of underperformance due to frequent changes with overvalued stocks is being experienced in the Nasdaq Composite and Nasdaq 100 index.

2011 Additions and Deletions Performance Review

In 2011, there were five companies added and five companies dropped (found here) to/from the Nasdaq 100 Index.  The following is the 1-year performance of those companies.

Symbol Name of companies added 2011 2012 % change
AVGO Avago Technologies 30.61 31.14 1.73%
FOSL Fossil, Inc. 86.36 90.67 4.99%
GOLD Randgold Resources  108.51 99.65 -8.17%
MNST Monster Bev. (prev. Hansen Nat.) 48.57 53.38 9.90%
NUAN Nuance Communications 24.74 22.01 -11.03%
Average change for companies added to Nasdaq 100 index:   -0.51%
         
         
Symbol Name of companies dropped 2011 2012 % change
FLIR FLIR Systems, Inc.  25.67 20.36 -20.69%
ILMN Illumina Inc. 28.37 51.22 80.54%
NIHD NII Holdings Inc. 20.23 6.32 -68.76%
QGEN Qiagen NV 14.34 17.6 22.73%
URBN Urban Outfitters Inc. 26.34 38.6 46.55%
Average change for companies dropped from Nasdaq 100 index:   12.08%

As was the case in last year’s changes to the 2010 Nasdaq 100, the stocks that were added could not exceed the returns of the stocks that were dropped from the index.  In the period from 2010 to 2011, the companies that were added lost –15.58% while the companies that were dropped lost “only” –3.45%.  Among the companies added to the index last year, based on our analysis of previous trends, we had said the following of Monster Beverage (formerly Hansen Natural):

“We believe that the recent re-introduction of Hansen Natural (HANS) will be among the top performing stocks at the time of the next re-ranking of the Nasdaq 100.”

One year later, Monster Beverage provided the top gain of all the stocks that were added last year.

image

Another observation made of the 2011 Nasdaq re-ranking was the following:

“Of the stocks that were added to the index (2010 re-ranking), the non-tech related companies, Dollar Tree (DLTR) and Whole Foods (WFM), outperformed with gains of 48% and 40%, respectively. This suggests that the “basics” will outperform in the coming year…”

Monster Beverage (MNST) and Fossil Inc. (FOSL), both not technology-related, provided the largest intra-year moves by rising as much as +60% before coming back to earth.  It should be noted that non-technology stocks performed the best over the last year.  While Randgold (GOLD) is not a technology stock, it was added to the index based on the hype surrounding the rise in the price of gold and was a more reactionary inclusion suggesting that underperformance was likely.

2010 Additions and Deletions Performance Review

The distinction of being added to the Nasdaq 100 should be considered an achievement. However, the path usually isn’t so easy after being added to the index.

In the middle of a bull market run, the stocks that were added to the Nasdaq 100 Index on December 20, 2010 (found here) have underperformed by a wide margin when compared to the Nasdaq 100 over the same period. Of the seven companies that were added at the time, only two stocks (both non-technology companies) have gains.

image_thumb1

Most investors would associate being added to the technology heavy Nasdaq 100 as an achievement. However, as we’ve indicated with the Dow Industrials in the past (found here and here), being added to an index usually occurs when a stock has already seen its best performance and is far likelier to decline than rise over the medium term (1-3 year period).

Symbol Company 2010 2012 % change
AKAM Akami 50.39 39.2 -22.21%
CTRP Ctrip.com 40.96 18.43 -55.00%
DLTR Dollar Tree 28.12 39.44 40.26%
FFIV F5 Networks 136.64 93.77 -31.37%
MU Micron Tech 8.14 6.67 -18.06%
NFLX Netflix 186.24 84.8 -54.47%
WFM Whole Foods 51.35 90.66 76.55%
      Average -9.19%
         
NDX Nasdaq 100 2223.04 2647.57 19.10%

All of the companies listed above are great for their own reasons, however, as a group the average return was –9.19% while the Nasdaq 100 Index managed to increase over +19% in the same 2-year period.

Nasdaq 100 Summary

  • The Nasdaq 100 cannot exceed the highs of 1999-2000 if the index is constantly adding high priced and overvalued stocks while at the same time taking out fairly valued and underpriced stocks.
  • Although more popularly known as a technology index, the Nasdaq 100 addition of companies that are not in the technology sector are expected to perform better than those associated with technology over the next 2-3 year periods.
  • Former Nasdaq 100 stocks that are being dropped from the index should be considered as potential investment opportunities based on their fundamental attributes.

Nasdaq 100: 2011 Re-Rank Review

On December 9, 2011, the Nasdaq OMX Group announced the names of the companies that would be added and dropped from the Nasdaq 100 Index.  This year there were five companies added and dropped. 
The five companies added in 2011 were:

Fossil, Inc.
Avago Technologies Limited
Nuance Communications, Inc.
Hansen Natural Corporation
Randgold Resources Limited

The five companies dropped in 2011 were:

Illumina, Inc.
Qiagen N.V.
NII Holdings, Inc.
Urban Outfitters, Inc.
FLIR Systems, Inc.

From the following valuation metrics, the companies that are being added to the Nasdaq 100 appear more overvalued than those being dropped.
  • As a group, the stocks being added to the Nasdaq 100 Index have an average price-to-earnings ratio of 60x.  The average price-to-earnings ratio of the stocks being dropped is 21x.
  • The average price-to-book ratio for the companies being added is 5.23x while the price-to-book ratio for the stocks being dropped is 2.40x.
  • On average, the stocks being added are approximately 50% above their 52-week low while the stocks being dropped are only 12% above their 52-week low.
The theory is that the companies being added to the index will significantly improve their earnings enough to justify their high price-to-earnings ratio.  Combined with the expectation of higher earnings is a higher stock price.  However, from our cursory review of the performance of the companies added and then dropped from the Nasdaq 100 Index in 2010, the inclusion into the index hasn’t immediately translated in an increase of the stock price.
In the table below we show the 1-year performance of the seven companies added and dropped from the Nasdaq 100 in 2010.  This performance is based on the announcement of December 13, 2010 until the closing price of December 9, 2011.

Symbol
2010
2011
% change
Akami (added)
50.68
28.11
-44.53%
C-Trip (added)
44.53
23.2
-47.90%
Dollar Tree (added)
55.85
82.55
47.81%
F-5 Networks (added)
139.06
114.74
-17.49%
Micron (added)
8.14
5.89
-27.64%
Netflix (added)
183.8
70.89
-61.43%
Whole Foods (added)
48.63
69.11
42.11%
Average
-15.58%
Cintas (dropped)
27.36
30.43
11.22%
Dish Network (dropped)
16.95
25.83
52.39%
Foster Wheeler (dropped)
33.51
19.36
-42.23%
Hologix (dropped)
17.42
17.2
-1.26%
J.B. Hunt (dropped)
39.49
44.74
13.29%
Logitech (dropped)
19.88
8.36
-57.95%
Patterson Companies (dropped)
29.23
29.34
0.38%
Average
-3.45%
Nasdaq 100
2207.45
2318.68
5.04%
Dow Jones Industrial Average
11428.56
12184.26
6.61%
S&P 500 Index
1240.46
1255.19
1.19%

While not a rousing success for either group, the companies that were added to the Nasdaq 100 Index suffered three times the loss than occurred for the stocks that were dropped from the index.  Of the stocks that were added to the index, the non-tech related companies, Dollar Tree (DLTR) and Whole Foods (WFM), outperformed with gains of 48% and 40%, respectively.  This suggests that the “basics” will outperform in the coming year if the economy continues to experience stagflation.  We believe that the recent re-introduction of Hansen Natural (HANS) will be among the top performing stocks at the time of the next re-ranking of the Nasdaq 100.
On November 18, 2011 (found here), we provided 13 companies that we believed were possible candidates for being removed from the Nasdaq 100 Index.  We were able to identify three of the five companies that were dropped from the index. The characteristic that was most pronounced for the companies being dropped from the Nasdaq 100 Index was a market capitalization of $4 billion or less and 80% less average trading volume.
Because the Nasdaq 100 Index has outperformed most other indexes since inception, it appears that the success of the index has more to do with the companies that are able to remain on the index for a longer period of time rather than those that are added and dropped.
The Punchline:
  • Stocks added to the Nasdaq 100 in 2011 are overvalued
  • Stocks dropped from the Nasdaq 100 in 2011 are undervalued
  • Stocks added in 2010 performed worse than stocks dropped in 2010
  • Of companies added, Hansen Natural (HANS) is expected to perform above average
  • Companies that are added or dropped from the index reduce the performance of the index
  • Out of the 100 companies in the index, we correctly identified 60% of those that were dropped
  • Companies on the Nasdaq 100 for an extended period of time may provide the basis for the index’s exceptional long-term performance