Leading indicators – as buy/sell indicators for the equities markets
Posted on 14 December 2009
The OECD composite leading indicators for October were released late last week – they too seem to be confirming that the rate of the recovery has peaked:
The aggregate CLI for the OECD countries plus Brazil, China, India, Indonesia, the Russian Federation and South Africa continues to move higher just at a slower pace. (Note that the CLI’s are principally driven by changes in monthly reported industrial production.)
So to the concept that the leading indicators will signal when equities are scheduled for a correction (credit to Albert Edwards of SocGen via Zero Hedge). The inference from the analysis was that with the ECRI and US Conference Board starting to slow, they are flashing a warning signal for equities.
Okay, but then got to thinking about the difference between the growth rate peaking and an actual decline in the leading indicators. As Albert pointed out – the time to sell in Japan was when the leading indicators turned down. They haven’t turned down – they are still going up – just that the slope of their ascent has tapered off. Here is the SocGen leading indicator mapped against the Nikkei:
So to check the difference between the two measures following is the performance of the Nikkei mapped against the OECD’s composite leading indicator for Japan over the last 20 years both in absolute terms and as against the percentage change in the indicator:
Now I’ve only highlighted those 9 times when the CLI actually tipped into negative territory. As a simple measure of the statement “sell when the leading indicator turns down”, if you had done so you would have be in the money 5 out of 9 times three months later (for an average gain of 1613 points) and 7 out of 9 times six months later (for an average gain of 2131 points).
Using that same metric, if you had instead sold when the growth rate turned down, the result was 5/9 (+198 points) and 6/9 (+1479 points). (I assumed three consecutive months of declines to confirm the ‘turn’.)
Without trying to over engineer this, a general conclusion was that selling when the growth rate turned down tended to be early. While on average selling when the CLI went negative resulted in an entry ~640 points lower than when the growth rate turned (with some notably wild swings around the average), the former outperformed both in the 3 month and 6 month time frames.
Conclusion
Still like the theory, particularly given the view that a self-sustaining recovery is about as likely as Australia winning the world cup (or for that matter the US). Just that it might be wise to temper enthusiasm for the recent slowdown in growth as a sell signal.
9 responses to Leading indicators – as buy/sell indicators for the equities markets
Leave a Response
Click on icon to subscribe
Copyright
DataDiary is published under the Creative Commons license regime
The reason that we have to divine something from the growth rate (first derivative) of the indexes instead of the indexes themselves is because most of the “leading indexes” are in fact leading challenged. They were developed using mid-20th century methodologies to measure mid-20th century economic data that changed at a mid-20th century pace. This ain’t the 20th century anymore.
Some people are trying to fix that problem. The numbers published by the Consumer Metrics Institute try to address these issues. They are daily and they capture consumer activities as far upstream as possible, in some cases before the retailers have finished booking the transactions.
The indexes themselves can be found at: http://www.consumerindexes.com/index.html.
FAQS can be reviewed at: http://www.consumerindexes.com/faqs.html.
Summary background information is available from the Wikipedia article on Consumer Leading Indicators: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Consumer_Leading_Indicators
The reason that we have to divine something from the growth rate (first derivative) of the indexes instead of the indexes themselves is because most of the “leading indexes” are in fact leading challenged. They were developed using mid-20th century methodologies to measure mid-20th century economic data that changed at a mid-20th century pace. This ain’t the 20th century anymore.
Some people are trying to fix that problem. The numbers published by the Consumer Metrics Institute try to address these issues. They are daily and they capture consumer activities as far upstream as possible, in some cases before the retailers have finished booking the transactions.
The indexes themselves can be found at: http://www.consumerindexes.com/index.html.
FAQS can be reviewed at: http://www.consumerindexes.com/faqs.html.
Summary background information is available from the Wikipedia article on Consumer Leading Indicators: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Consumer_Leading_Indicators
[...] Posted on 20 January 2010 Momentum continues to flag in the OECD CLI (refer to leading indicators as buy/sell signals for equities): [...]
[...] we looked at back in October – economic leading indicators can be useful in gauging the future direction of the equity [...]
[...] while we are referencing how others use these leading indexes, click here to view the December article where we tested Albert Edward’s suggestion that Japan’s [...]
[...] out (analysed in “Leading indicators as buy/sell indicators for equities markets” here) – the lesson from the Japanese experience of the 90’s was to sell the rally when the [...]
Another admirablee insights..I like this one above all .. Mark
[...] may have maintained the bearish rage throughout, but he did make the point (in December 2009 here) to buy equities when the government is stimulating. It was a good call – the same one that [...]
[...] remain defensively positioned into the end of the stimulus. It’s a time tested strategy (see here for our test of the Albert Edwards playbook). « Previous Entry The end of the commodity [...]