Posts

Yellen - Why Is It Not Working?

FED Speak, FED Hike, FED Squawk – Some Disccusion

Yesterday we posted these comments regarding the FED:

Another anecdotal issue is that the FED is due to report their unbelievably tortured analysis and process geared to raise interest rates by only 25 basis points. However, at this point the FED credibility is pretty tattered and IF they raise interest rates they will be viewed as non-data dependent to the contrary of their propaganda. If they do not raise interest rates they will be show that the verity of their analysis and policies is likely sorely lacking. In either case, the best the FED can do is damage their credibility or damage it more. Not particularly wonderful outcomes and for the markets this could imply that no matter what the FED does will be received negatively.

Yellen - Why Is It Not Working?

Yellen?

It is worth noting that if things get too challenging in the markets, the Fed may decide not only "no hike" but QE and effectively "rate cut". This woul be data driven of course and all in the span of less than 2 weeks of data. The question is would any new QE solve the problem? While there is no reason to doubt that a rally on some QE announcement would occur, the problem is that we are facing liquidations of malinvestments. As in 2010, after the initial rally in equities, QE funds and liquidity sought an avenue for allocation - the chosen allocation was not previous dubious products - and did not immediately go into equities or bonds - it went into commodities.  This caused dislocation in the commodities markets with many commodities rising hundreds of percent in a very short time - which in turn caused the "Arab Spring" (which was no "spring" but rather a revolt by starving citizens) as many poor and middle-class Middle Eastern people were unable to afford necessities of rice and other foods. They were forced to choose between buying food or paying rent. Similarly, were sitting in the situation in which junk bonds need to be liquidated and QE liquidity would not be allocated easily to junk at this time. Therefore, the only option for the Fed, which this analyst feels would further damage their credibility, would be for the Fed to directly purchase declining assets and junk bonds. Certainly, the FED can purchase junk bonds and represent them on a portfolio at par as they have done with many of the bankrupt entity debt that that they purchased in 2008 and 2009 (Maiden Lane III Portfolio) - but this does not inspire confidence.

So, in summary, it appears that if damage becomes pronounced to the equity and debt markets now or int he future theFed may need to attempt to directly arrest it. However, their tools are not precise and not effective. Moreover, they would be seeing as hypocritical because how could they not see this coming, and, in fact, want to do a rate hike just before major damage to bond and equity markets would occur. Either way, the situation as it seems to this analyst, is a no-win outcome for the Fed, no matter what they do. The best probable scenario that likely exists is that the Fed just buys every asset that is going down and attempts to arrest decline by increasing the balance sheet further and also deteriorating its quality.

Is it really possible, that if these options are even on the table? And would they work or make a difference for more than a short time?

Update Regarding NYSE Levels Chart From Yesterday

Yesterday, the NYSE index showed significant weakness, and normally would have faded below the cyan level marked below. This being a FED day, we mentioned that if the cyan (10,300ish) level was recaptured the primary degree (Yellow) level would likely be a magnet. We are currently sitting at that retest today which should be a much bigger challenge and potential reaction for the index. Additionally, the 20day and 100-day moving averages are right at this level. Either way, the picture remains the same. In fact, the action of large caps today is even more suspect because their visibility and earnings are deeply impacted by the strength in the dollar - which is not something the FED can not easily compensate for with QE or rates.

NYSE Levels

Updated Daily/Weekly Market Structure Projections

Ready Or Not Inflection Point Approaches as Central Banks Seek to Destroy Bear Paticipation

It has indeed turned out to be an interesting week, with the Fed meeting causing fireworks as should be expected. Clearly, this was a coordinated effort, as posted in the MCM lounge earlier this week. The Fed has sought to cushion "changing of its wording or its intentions" with coordinated actions and hyperbole from other central banks. This is the type of behavior exhibited last year when, in seeking to prevent the per Bernake taper tantrum reaction that had occurred previously, they coordinated with the Bank of Japan, the Bank of England and the ECB to indicate or to actually trigger liquidity programs or accommodation. That sought to offset the impact of the Federal Reserve producing accommodation or leverage. This year has been exactly the same.

Clearly, the impacts of a Fed rate hike can set off a firestorm. There are tremendous risks to the creation of as much leverage as been irresponsibly created and to changing the cycle with reference to this leverage.

The primary risk being that the Fed is actually not in control of interest rates, after all and that a shift can take interest rates into their own direction, regardless of Fed desires. In order to make the Fed policy morph into an illusion of rational deduction and analysis based on data, and to facilitate the appearance of markets interpreting a change in policy as an indication of a sound economic environment, it is clear that the central banks were up to old tricks using unlimited liquidity to purchase risk assets on full bore yesterday. This appears to be yet another tactic "doomed to failure" of these irrational, inappropriate and highly risky policies. Indeed, the actions by the central banks appear to have sought to shake bearish resolve and encourage bullish speculation - and these conditions can obviously be seen in the risk markets presently.

The chart below is the market structure projection chart that we have been publishing for months. It has provided a good guide for the general movements of the markets. Recently is become clear that the markets which sometimes will move plus or minus a week to these projections have consistently been leading about a week since roughly May/June. In evaluating this behavior, we are presenting a chart which shows market structure projection both as it has been plotted and published on these pages - the dark magenta line, and also the same market structure projection plot shown offset by one week. As can be seen, especially in the near-term, these projections have been prescient and accurate. We are now entering timing tolerances shown by the boxed areas on the chart below that are probably for an inflection point. This coming inflection point is a very serious inflection point. Its significance implies a turn from up to down in the markets for the next five months or so - with weakness biasing into February and March next year.

Updated Daily/Weekly Market Structure Projections

Updated Daily/Weekly Market Structure Projections

Character of a Composite Day in September

Below is a composite of the net character of all September Biased Market Structure. Each day is netted out to just one imaginary day for each of the databases: 24 QE Era data (Magenta), Inverse Market Structure (Cyan), 20 Year Market Structure (Red) and Bear Market Structure (Gold). What we can see is that if any progress is made in September it generally happens in short bursts of strong days and more than likely very strong overnight sessions. Other than that the general tendency is towards weakness during the day session. Highs like to form int he pre-market between 3:00 AM and 6:00 AM EST and lows like to form in the afternoon in the 1:00 PM to 2:00 PM timing. So, this makes the pulse of the market in September orient around a timing window of 5:00 AM and 1:30 PM with generally only two timing points. This is unusual as it is more usual to have three. However, these structures may be quite useful for trading the rest of the month. We will post additional details for members.

September 2015 COMPOSITE Intraday Market Structure Projections

September 2015 COMPOSITE Intraday Market Structure Projections

FED-Day Targeted Intraday MSP Probability Analysis

Below is a highly targeted MSP analysis that uses our database and MSP algorithms to project data probability scenarios and timing specific to all FED days and in context for today particularly. The interesting thing is that I had expected to see some more positive options and, in fact, the scenarios are MORE negatively skewed. This accentuates the fact that the occurrence of AM session highs, significantly put at risk positive follow through this afternoon. Most negative is the QE data-set in Magenta. Should pre-6:00 AM highs characterize the morning session, probabilities increase for more pronounced weakness that flows into the afternoon and OVERNIGHT sessions.

Note that because this statistical analysis is ONLY specific to FED DAY Data - NO MSP is shown of non-FED days on the chart below.

June 17th, 2015 FED DAY DATA SET Intraday Market Structure Projections

June 17th, 2015 FED DAY DATA SET Intraday Market Structure Projections

Adaptive Modal Decision Making & Projection

This post updates today's intraday market structures.  The Daily Projection posted this AM was for weakness into tomorrow AM. In addition, a plethora of data to help during the day from e-Tick-Tools, Gap Tools (which did not favor a gap fill but did an opening range break down) and accumulation index there were a lot of data to support the weakening foundations of the market today - plus a number of capitulatory extremes marked a break of 2105 as critical. Market needed to regain this or was facing the 2088 area that was mention several times here on these pages.

Below is an example of even coming out looking for morning lows as a bullish potential was probabilistically reduced in outcome at each timing area and why...Essentially by 12:00 PM most likely structure was relegated to the CYAN 24 month QE projections - this information among quite a few other elements and discussion was available in our community in real-time today.

June 4th, 2015 Intraday Market Structure Projections

IMAGINARY NUMBERS – Part 1: the Deceptive Nature of Centrally Planned Economic Reporting

Over the last years, our efforts have been more and more focused on statistical, data and fact based modeling. During these efforts, we have witnessed truly remarkable events in the world of Central Banking and finance. We have also found troubling market evidence and data that have made it clear, that all may not be what it seems - for a long time. A very long time.

We will add some reference links to this article if anyone is interested or finds it necessary to understand further elements that will only topically discuss today. However, we will assume your familiarity and basic understanding of the methods of Central Banking and Monetary Policy. Understanding it is both simple and complex - and specifically designed to be that way.

The FED Monster

BACKGROUND

The creation of money is implemented via the creation of new credit for almost all of the quantity of money in existence. The remaining very small amount of money is created by printing or manufacture of physical cash. The dollars in your pocket for instance. With the creation of all this money, one would think that the Central Banks and the Treasury would be the major manufacturers. However, the reality is that most new money is created directly by Banks under the supposed auspices of the Central Banking system.

Whichever way one looks at the above scheme, it is clear that any scheme would be fraught with risk in which private individuals were not only enabled but encouraged, banking license in hand, to lend money into existence as fast and in as great of quantities as possible. Further rewarding said individuals with benefits such as shares and large bonuses for executing a primarily non-accretive activity, is conflicted and dangerous.

The reason for touching on this subject is that the FED, which operates as the Central Bank of the World, and its subordinate Central Banks and Institutions, primarily IMF, WBG, BIS, BOJ, BOE, ECB and SNB, have a keen awareness that charging interest on a quantity of money that is constantly growing and never available in great enough quantity to repay the interest on the credit that created it, is not plausible - even with accounting and reporting slight-of-hand. Therefore, these institutions have been constantly looking for new debt servitude candidates and for new ways to create money and amplify money without amplifying debt obligations. Better said, ways to increase the quantity money at a faster rate than the quantity of debt.

These expansionist policies went into overdrive in the late 90's heading into Y2K. I distinctly recall the outright panic that the FED tried to convey at every possible opportunity regarding the two digits 99, as in 1999, flipping to 00, as in 2000. It was overt, misleading and disturbing. Mr. Greenspan was in fact openly discussing the risk of Y2K not only on the financial system but the nuclear defense system and global war machine with obvious implications for a WWIII type scenario. Since when does that not qualify as fear mongering as an agenda?

Wall Street Banks were granted huge tax breaks and special arrangements to prepare for the coming of God -  Y2K. There were quite a lot of religious extremists at the time whose belief was that Y2K would herald the end of the world and the coming of God. They got no breaks or accommodations for their equally zealous expressions of belief. Sadly, they were far less dangerous than Mr. Greenspan who had similar compunction - masked in Fedspeak...not to mention his disciple "Blogger Ben" lurking in the wings.

While working as a consultant/developer at several of the largest US banks in derivatives, structured products, and fixed income at the time, anything and everything that could be dumped into the Y2K budget was. There were several large advantages to this. One being that large firms could reduce their reported expenses and show tremendous productivity gains at the very same time as expanding their technology R&D expenditures and investments simply by putting any expense they could find into a different box for reporting and amortization. This had huge tax implications since special considerations and incentives were also made to support Y2K via various accommodations including  tax. Earnings, productivity, and profits all the way into 2000, could, therefore, be goosed by a slush fund that essentially disappeared real expenses out of existence and magically into profits.

Wall Street, with all this free cash, FED encouragement and ever declining interest rates was looking for any way to seed its imaginary and cheap money in ever aggressive manners to the world - fueling the dot.com bubble and supported by the constant delusionary recursive productivity claims from Mr. Greenspan. I believe this was the other era when the words "virtuous cycle" were used by major central banks. The end of this scheme climaxed with offers of mortgages on stock holdings regardless of whether investments be in Yahoo or Pets.com or IBM. These products required no liquidations to raise cash for down payment, no sales of securities ever to pay the mortgage off. Your mortgage could be paid off by asset appreciation of one's investment account. No Tax obligations due to asset sales. Most importantly, how much more one could spend on a home now that they can get this fantastic mortgage and keep your stock portfolio while ending up getting the house for free. A total dream! Thank goodness these mortgages did not become as popular as the subprime variety. Nonetheless, the Fed presided over these products and approved their origination. The FED, to great effect, encouraged most of the irresponsible gambling. The ultimate goal? Asset price appreciation and capitalization (money amplification) that increases at a greater quantity than debt expansion.

Money amplification was on fill tilt via many new and exotic products and derivatives. These products, as with the Y2K policy regarding the financial system were designed under the specific encouraging oversight of the FED. In many cases, at the behest of the FED. This is no small matter as the FED was already scared at the time that it was running out of ways to expand credit and money fast enough. Additionally, they were even more concerned about the creation of enough quantity of cash to service credit obligations. This is what one sees currently on full tilt in China. A crashing real estate market where debts are unserviceable and central planning looks for any way to put sufficient cash in the hands of debtors to theoretically honor their obligations.

After attempting to UN-JAPAN itself from Y2K, the FED reversed its aggressive credit expansionary agenda of the late 90's, once, without calamity, nuclear war or financial meltdown, Y2K had come and gone and they had little cover for such extensive accommodation. The results were obvious to effect. Credit fueled speculation and investing by internet technology firms, sovereigns, and large multinational firms met a tighter and tighter market and was unable to rollover obligations. How many times do we have to play this illogical game? Pressure on the markets was substantial, and a bear market ensued into October 2002. Under the cover of September 11 terrorist attacks, Mr. Greenspan, now had a popular and patriotic excuse for financial modernization unlike we have ever seen in history and began an aggressive search for stratospheric credit expansion via an unending cycle of low rates and regulatory underreach, policy drift and leverage accommodation. This obviously created a new speculation not only in the real-estate markets but much more substantially in the OTC derivatives and debt markets.

CRASH BANG BOOM AGAIN

What would have been obvious to any  sensible and practical thinker would be that result of overleveraging will always end the same. Only Central Bankers appear to think that constant asset price appreciation, 2% inflation targets, debt expansion and currency debasement are components of practical policy.

The practicality of this kind of planning and care of our society, especially the most junior and senior members of it, is certainly highly questionable and irresponsible. It would be obvious to nearly any sentient human that a deleveraging of epic proportions must be in order when firms who were levered 40 to 1 were still not making enough money and so decided that levering  80 to 1, and in many cases much more, was reasonable and appropriate.

No need to discuss the chaotic deleveraging of 2007 to 2009...save with respect to the fact that the obvious answer via planning and policy has been to solve that problem with the same solution 100X. So, take conditions that could not be pushed to further extreme in 2006 and 2007 without central bank directly buying the CDO's, CMO's, CDS's and debt notes of the era to MUCH more significant extreme by doing the only thing they did not do in 2006 and 2007....become the market.

IMAGINARY NUMBERS

Obviously, the FED, during the 2008 to 2009 period got quite used to holding highly risky securities on its books. With the creation of "mark to whatever and whenever you want accounting" it believes it is not obligated to ever show a loss. So, the risks of holding securities, no matter how insolvent or valueless is perceived by the FED as "low". This is so as long as they can maintain confidence in the currency. Recall that the FED bought all the assets from Bear Sterns that JPM did not want. These included several Hotel chains that subsequently ended up insolvent to the tune of something like $20 billion of FED held assets in addition to many other horrid debts that when examined on Maiden Lane Holding's books - miraculously show persistent profits. We are now in the thick of the reason for this article. Imaginary Numbers.

Currently, the FED sits at 1% reserves. This would be the same thing as a normal investor owning $1,000,000 with collateral of only $10,000. The bank has publically stated that it would be of little consequence to them if they were to move to -1% or -2% equity because "...they hold till maturity". To put this in perspective, as a trader with an account at Interactive Brokers, if your account were $250,000, what the FED is saying, is that as long as you wish to "hold to maturity", your account can go to -$500,000 without any consequence.

Any thinking by those who are responsible for the sanctity of our currency and debt system that shows egregious speculation and fudging of numbers of any type should be a call to alarm. Sadly, if the inanity of aforementioned FED comments were all that was to worry about with regard to imaginary numbers and deceptive policies - this would be bad enough, but possibly manageable. However, the reason for the BACKGROUND section of this article is to present that the FED and other central banks have been attempting for long periods of time to create and implement new methods of printing money that do not involve direct transmission of new interest payment obligations. These policies and interventionist approaches become increasingly risky as their reserve ratio decreases. Especially beyond negative 2%. FED tactics should inspire nothing but doubt at this point as their risk levels are much greater than they are publically admitting.

Via our analysis and data, it has become clear via our indexes and statistical analyses like the GAP index, that especially after the 1987 crash an extremely large entity began an agenda of directly seeding money into large risk and debt markets at low liquidity time periods and without regard for loss. To give this some color, let's take a look at the current margin debt markets. Currently, margin debt sits at a record of over $450 billion. How much asset appreciation and market capitalization does $450 billion margin debt buy you? Well, let's look at some more of our data. Last year roughly $650 billion of incoming cash was used to purchase all US stocks. Analysis of only the S&P500, this resulted in the creation of $2.4 Trillion of new theoretically spendable money with say only roughly $50 billion of increase of margin debt. Our calculations are for cash into ALL US stocks, therefore, the amount of total asset appreciation, when applied to all US stocks rather than specifically the S&P500 is estimated to be more like in the $4 trillion area rather than $2.4 trillion. That is quite a substantial amount of money amplification.

To the FED way of thinking this is a veritable panacea. Imagine what printing $85 billion a month can do if only $650 billion creates $2.4 trillion in new equity in only the S&P500. Just put into perspective how much new money/equity that $450 billion of margin can create. Money amplification at its finest.

2014 & 2015 Equity Cash Flow

2014 & 2015 Equity Cash Flow

Year S&P500 Market Cap S&P500 Asset Appreciation
Centrally Planned Money Amplification
Jan 2014 $17,186,722,100,000 N/A
Jan 2015  $19,557,305,460,000 $2,371,000,000,000
Current $19,754,854,000,000 $197,549,000,000

So, as we can see, it could be quite effective policy for the FED to play fast and loose with policies, numbers, and reports. The sad fact is that this has most likely been the case for a long time and as such we have not had truly free markets for a much longer time than the last few years. Our market structure algorithms have located this constant drip of capital into assets. Markets that the central banks have no authority over. However, their activity has been like a metronome ensuring that prices travel on a long-term inexorable rise and that they go mostly unnoticed. Via, which accounts these holdings are transacted, would be of significant interest. Having worked on the Fixed Income Desk at one of the largest primary dealers and analyzing, valuing transactions on lots of accounts including unmarked, secret FED accounts inspires little confidence in FED benevolence but rather does so for its unending self-serving appetite and lack of transparency.

MORE & MORE IMAGINARY NUMBERS - THE GREAT GDP DECEPTION

Let's look at a some more evidence. We did a detailed study of the GDP and CPI reports and found highly disturbing discrepancies that, of course, are promptly ignored by the largest media and financial institutions. There are several discretionary and arbitrary key components to the GDP, CPI and PPI calculations that offer a rather startling basis for any statistician:

  • Seasonal Adjustments
  • Hedonic Adjustments
  • Imputed Contributions

Seasonal Adjustments revolve around ever changing accommodations for tendencies of economic contributors to vary due to cyclical oscillation. However, there is simply very few quantifiable cyclical basis' that seem to be consistently applied by the FED or reporting bureaus. Rather, seasonal adjustments seem to reflect the discretion of some bureaucrat or entity seeking to goal seek values.

Hedonic Adjustments are quality adjustments that attempt to adjust for inequality of product over time. These calculations are utterly useless and 100% discretionary arbitrary. At best Hedonic Adjusted data should be viewed as a secondary reporting index, not a primary index. We will examine this a bit more detail below as they are used to great effect.

Imputations are non-economic contributors that are deemed to reflect economic transactional contribution. These too are convenient, arbitrary and highly discretionary and are used to great effect. They are statistically deceptive and mostly entirely irrelevant.

What does this have to do with the FED? And to do with Imaginary Numbers?

First and foremost, in a supposed nonsupervisory role - the FED accepts the above data without complaint or conflict. That alone is more than interesting. Methodologies for such data should be very closely scrutinized not accepted. We are of the opinion that the FED and central banking accept these numbers because they supervise their manufacture. These are the key numbers for vast campaigns to co-opt real capital and money into alternates. In any such long-term agenda, several layers would be required to execute:

The FED:

  • MUST be allowed to supervise and administer (goal seek) most official government economic reporting.
  • MUST exercise more and more interventions and press conferences to expand manipulative tentacles in various markets with direct capital support.
  • MUST attempt to combine data in such a way as to represent a cohesive argument that seems somewhat believable.

On the practical side, it is impossible for the many economic reports that are published to be managed in a cohesive manner without tacit control and supervision. It is simply impossible for the FED to accept methodologies that would not meet its standards or agenda. Therefore, from this perspective, the FED is the only logical supervisor. The two most important numbers the FED needs to convince the world and public are real and plausible are GDP and Inflation. Both areas are reported with such lack of discipline and goal seeking that the published numbers are utterly useless.

Take the GDP calculations and reporting reflected below. This chart shows what is a nearly perfect parabola. There is simply no way to create such a perfect series of numbers in nature out of something so complex as the millions of US economic elements, businesses, and people. This is GOAL SEEK and CURVE FITTING at it highest extreme. There is simply a less than 15% believability in these numbers based on the basic understanding on how statistics works. On a simple level? Does your bank account look like this? Even if one is a member of the .001% it is highly unlikely that one's accounts look like this or even 30% like this. Normal series will show MUCH more volatility and noise even if the end points end up being the same - just like Warren Buffet's bank account surely does.

If these numbers were correct in any fashion, US corporations and citizens would be feeling rather different at this time. Just compare, the price of Oil to reported GDP...there is simply no explanation for this disconnect from official sources. Just shut up and believe the numbers, please.

GDP 2015 as reflected in FRED database

GDP 2015 as reflected in FRED database

FRED GDP Comparison

FRED GDP Comparison

A CLOSER LOOK AT GDP

Hedonic Adjustments

The term “hedonics” is derived from ancient Greek and basically means “pleasure doctrine”. Certainly apt and intriguing.

An iPhone last year cost $700 and an iPhone this year cost $700. However, in the current GDP reporting, these numbers are calculated to incorporate qualitative and subjective;y adjusted contributions to GDP. So, theoretically, if the screen, camera and memory of the iPhone improved. These improvements are estimated for dollar value and contribute to GDP in excess of the $700 transaction for the iPhone. So, i can randomly put a $500 value on the improvements to these elements. BAMM - now iPhones of the same type all contribute $1,200 to GDP.  If the addition of new tools and features such as the fingerprint sensor occur, then those are quantified and added to GDP. BAMM BAMM - now a $700 iPhone transaction is worth $1,500 to GDP.

CPI

The funny thing about goal seeking is how insidious it is. In the above process for the iPhone contribution to GDP, the adjustments that increased GDP are used to discount CPI. This artificially suppresses what is more like an annual 11% inflation rate into something like a 2 or 3% percent inflation rate. Theoretically, an iPhone sells for $700 this year and the equivalent model sold for $700 last year. Hedonics allows the adjustment of the iPhone inflation rate by the additional features and improvements purchasers are not paying for. So $700 - $300 for a better screen, camera, and memory. BAMM now the inflation rate on iPhone is -40%. throw in new features and its down to a number in the CPI of 60% lower than the previous year if we so desire.

This contradiction has obvious benefits. It misrepresents true inflation for the whole economy and average person and GDP. This makes the GDP number look better and more efficient. Additionally, it gooses GDP on top of that with the actual hedonically contributed cash values added to real transactions.

As a statistical analyst, I must say this is incompetent data collection and analysis at best.

Imputations

Imputations are totally imaginary. If you have paid off your house or receive free offers in the mail, coupons from the grocery store, free bank fees or back to the iPhone, certain intellectual property was developed during the year for the iPhone (say some software innovation or R&D project) that does not result in a direct transaction, these elements can all be arbitrarily be estimated and then contributed to GDP. In the case that you own your home outright, imputed GDP contributions are the result of calculating the value of your home and what you would be paying in rent and then recording those imaginary rent payments as positive contributions to GDP.

Needless to say, the obvious nefarious capability of these elements is huge.

WOULDN'T YOU KNOW IT?

Since 2009 wouldn't you know it that the primary growth of GDP has occurred not in the advertised headline numbers but similar to the character of just about everything out of official sources these days, in the arbitrary values. This is not unlike the artificial liquidity available to corporations to buy stock, increasing the "E" in EPS but not increasing the "S" in gross or net sales. A mirage that it seems is only too happy to be propagated. SO, in 2009 there were roughly the same amount of Americans working as there are now, only the population has increased by 30 million since then. In 2009, GDP was reported at roughly $14.5 trillion. Currently, the reporting proposes a number of $17.5 trillion. HOWEVER, in 2009 GDP minus imputations and hedonics was $9.5 Trillion. Today when you subtract out hedonics and imputations you get $10.5 trillion. Is that not curious?

In 6 years the US GDP grew by a real $1 trillion NOT $3 trillion.

This would imply a growth rate of imputed contributions of 17.5% a year in an economy unable to deliver much more than a reliable 1.75% growth during that time. As for Hedonic contributions, they are hitting at a growth rate of 20% annually. However you cut it, this is in our opinion engineered, goal-seeked data that is meaningless with regard to the true economy, but very good for the US Debt to GDP ratio...and, therefore, credit worthiness. It is also, convenient for FED policy. The only rational explanation for the constant error and risk distribution always being pushed into the column that benefits the FED agenda is the FED. At best, this pattern can be attributed to incompetence...which on its face is even scarier than the alternative that is knowingly misrepresented and manipulated data as a part of an agenda.

GDP Analysis with Hedonics and Imputations Broken Out
GDP Year Cash GDP No
Discretionary Arbitrary Adjustments
Officially
Reported GDP

(Billions)
Total Guessed 
& Non-financial
Contributions to GDP
Imputed GDP Values & Non-financial transacted GDP Assumptions (In Billions) Estimated
Imputation
Percentage of GDP
Imputation
Increase
(in Billions)
Hedonic
Adjustments
Increase
(in Billions)
Hedonic
Adjustment
Percent of GDP
2007 $9,892 $14,441 $4,550 $2,225 15.41% $133.5 $2,325 16.10%
2008 $9,585 $14,547 $4,962 $2,358 16.21% $141.5 $2,604 17.90%
2009 $9,355 $14,564 $5,209 $2,500 17.16% $150.0 $2,709 18.60%
2010 $9,734 $15,232 $5,498 $2,650 17.40% $159.0 $2,848 18.70%
2011 $9,894 $15,819 $5,925 $2,809 17.76% $168.5 $3,116 19.70%
2012 $10,142 $16,420 $6,278 $2,977 18.13% $178.6 $3,300 20.10%
2013 $10,239 $16,891 $6,652 $3,156 18.68% $189.4 $3,496 20.70%
2014 $10,376 $17,200 $6,824 $3,345 19.45% $200.7 $3,478 20.22%

DYNAMITE IN A CAN

The FED promotes confidence as does its recently created outpost the ECB and the previous central bank that the FED is 100% responsible for creating and supervising - the BOJ. However, these institutions can promote their agenda so long as their reserve ratios are close to positive. When they start dropping below 3%, then the likelihood of loss of confidence becomes VERY VERY high, and this is NOT a situation the central banks can control. People will want to see the central banks fund reserves - the options at this time will be limited to them and most likely met with hyperbole: "Trust us we know what we are doing, we expect a strong resumption of strength next year" type commentary.

The other reasons that we are posting this article now is that things can happen in an unscripted order and given our article from May 24th: Drama in the Market Seas – a revealing look via the MCM Market Indexes, the primary activity driving market prices may be quickly put under severe distress.

Moreover, given the horrific and obvious manipulation of CPI, PPI and GDP - are these signs of an ethically compromised, panicked and fractured institution showing up just when we may need the opposite?

LEARNING & SOME GOOD WATCHING

Money for Nothing (Five Stars)
Markets and governments around the world hold their breath in anticipation of the Fed Chairman's every word. Yet the average person knows very little about the most powerful - and least understood - financial institution on earth. Narrated by Liev Schreiber, Money For Nothing is the first film to take viewers inside the Fed and reveal the impact of Fed policies - past, present, and future - on our lives. Join current and former Fed officials as they debate the critics, and each other, about the decisions that helped lead the global financial system to the brink of collapse in 2008. And why we might be headed there again

Below is a link to a whole Money for Nothing documentary. However, if the link is pulled down - the movie is HIGHLY recommended worth buying from the director or other online source.

97% Owned (Five Stars)
97% owned present serious research and verifiable evidence on our economic and financial system. This is the first documentary to tackle this issue from a UK-perspective and explains the inner workings of Central Banks and the Money creation process. When money drives almost all activity on the planet, it's essential that we understand it. Yet simple questions often get overlooked, questions like; where does money come from? Who creates it? Who decides how it gets used? And what does this mean for the millions of ordinary people who suffer when the monetary, and financial system, breaks down? A film by Michael Oswald, Produced by Mike Horwath, featuring Ben Dyson of Positive Money, Josh Ryan-Collins of The New Economics Foundation, Ann Pettifor, the "HBOS Whistleblower" Paul Moore, Simon Dixon of Bank to the Future and Nick Dearden from the Jubliee Debt Campaign.

Princes of the Yen: Central Bank Truth Documentary  (Five Stars)
“Princes of the Yen: Central Banks and the Transformation of the Economy” reveals how Japanese society was transformed to suit the agenda and desire of powerful interest groups, and how citizens were kept entirely in the dark about this.

Richard Werner on banking and how banks create money (Four Stars)
Interesting Lecture by Richard Werner regarding what is WRONG with out financial system

Some market structure review and analysis for today…

Below are the current MS (market structure) projections as of today. Daily and Weekly are below. These shows turn pressure from upward to downward on the Weekly (Magenta line) and very nice tracking up till today for the daily (thick white line). Tuesday to Wednesday AM projected moderately up biased from yesterday morning - looks like it could be a challenge. Nonetheless, we have learned not to ignore their potential because they have been prescient. For a many reasons, today's reaction out of yesterday's low could be a relatively sizable move.

May 27, 2015 Daily & Weekly Market Structure Projection

May 27, 2015 Daily & Weekly Market Structure Projection

Below is more granular view of the shorter term options for market structure. There is sizeable potential for a morning high and afternoon weakness, however the most probable market structure appears to be inverted QE showing in cyan. If strength continues into the 8:00 am area then its probable that we get a consolidation retrace with probability for something like a 1:00 pm high.

Keep in mind THIS IS NOT TRADING ADVICE - these tools are a representation of algorithmic analysis of past market facts and metrics distilled into structure and then referenced against today.

May 27, 2015 Intraday Market Structure Projection

May 27, 2015 Intraday Market Structure Projection

Drama in the Market Seas – a revealing look via the MCM Market Indexes

This article goes into detail regarding some diagnostics of the market that are not easily or often seen and most importantly are most often inaccurate as publicly they are presented. We go into some considerable detail to see what is happening under the hood of the market. The surprising discovery is that most investors are most likely not doing very well.

Drama on the Market Seas

Drama on the Market Seas

MCM DAY INDEX & MCM CLOSE INDEX

For the day trader - the day session performance has been under-performing for a very long time over all. However, if one were trading the opening and/or the close session - for the last 6 months performance has been especially challenging. Despite all the headlines regarding new highs in the markets every other day:

The most surprising discovery is that most investors are most likely not doing very well. For the day trader,  market day session performance has been under-performing market direction substantially for a very long time. However, if one were trading the opening and/or the close session, for the last 6 months performance has been especially challenging.

To summarize, despite all the headlines regarding new highs in the markets every other day:

  • For the closing session long traders, the market is an absolute disaster and likely would lead to egregious losses taking account balances back very near 2009 levels.
  • For opening session long traders, the market is not quite a horrible with account balances presently approaching Oct 2008 levels.

MCM Indexes and MCM Smart Money Indexes

MCM Indexes and MCM Smart Money Indexes

MCM GAP INDEX

There is one area of performance that has been remarkably good.

Much better than at any point in history that we have examined.

 From what it seems - quite probably "too good".

Evidence of central bank cooperation and intervention abound. We have discovered quite a few Central Bank driven "market structures" that have been very strong. Interestingly, it appears that central bank money printing and money amplification efforts via asset interventions and appreciation have been in place for a very, very long time. These market structures go back in history to the 70's and 80's. What seems clear, market crashes notwithstanding, is that central banks are operating and have been operating to increase and amplify the quantity of money via asset markets for a significant duration. Regardless, however, the levels central bank participation of the last years have been unprecedented. , there we have it, the best performance in the markets has been in the areas where the central banks get the most "bang for the buck". The thinly traded and easily influenced overnight session.

Result: The best and pretty much only performance in the markets since 2009 has been in the areas where the central banks get the most "bang for the buck". The thinly traded and easily influenced overnight session.

Currently, from a cursory appearance, there seems to be somewhat of a panic going on. hThe GAP INDEX is now dramatically outperforming prices...while at the same time market are dramatically underperforming during the high liquidity sessions. The question that comes to mind is:

"What happens if the overnight session levitation and performance starts to fail?"

This question can be answered in context: If it were not for the overnight session performance over the last nine months, the markets would be in an all out bear market and most probably crash.

SMART MONEY INDEX

The SMART MONEY INDEX is often touted and bandied about on the internet and TV. However, rarely can a more unviable and distorted index - being highly aberrantly calculated and on its face flawed - be so mispresented.

For this reason, we calculate a reasonable, viable and thorough version of the concept that uses sophisticated synthetics for the dramatic consequences of the ultra slow open of the S&P500 and highly distorted opening prices. As with our GAP index, we use a combination of futures and other ETF 's to synthesize the cash opening prices. This leads to a very high accuracy using our methods of calculation as opposed to the what we normally see published. For the record, it is our opinion that is usually best to ignore any general reference to the SMART MONEY INDEX. Though the SMART MONEY INDEX concept sounds nice - sexy even, as it is calculated it is statistically distorted to the point of being useless.

Using a reliable methodology, however, valuable data can be gleaned from the SMART MONEY INDEX concept. We call our version that the MCM SMART MONEY INDEX. What this tool shows in the included chart in the article via the green line - is a collapse in the "SMART MONEY" investor commitment.

Keep in mind that with overnight Central Bank activity at record highs, the impact of a dramatic fall off in institutional participation may have different impacts than expected. However, it seems that the case for a sudden collapse in the markets due to the absence of professional money may be increasing.

 

 

 

Daily Market Structure Projections Analysis into the Holiday

Daily projection continued their unparalleled run of prescient and accurate daily directional projections. The levels of accuracy have been surprising even though we do expect good results. The reality is that it seems that the added elements to our datasets increased accuracy more than expected. Next week looks like there could be some volatility coming in when the market officially reopen.

It was an interesting day intraday the Bear Market Structure did end up tracking. This was mentioned in the morning post. Certainly, however, and most important the time windows were useful and accurate as markets turned at these windows +/-. However, intraday was not clean for projections due to the gap - However, it must be said that Gap Tools and e-Tick Tools were very accurate. If there is time, e-Tick-Tools for today may be discussed in a weekend post. Today was interesting in that we had 90+% percentile selling and buying extremes during the day that market significant levels in the markets.

May 22, 2015 Daily and Weekly Projections

May 22, 2015 Daily and Weekly Projections

May 22, 2015 Intraday Market structure Projection

May 22, 2015 Intraday Market structure Projection