You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
SPY, XLF, IYT - charts indicate that the Bottom is IN!
- Thread starter option_trad3r
- Start date
Quote from bwolinsky:
Same answer. Go calculate book value. I'll give you a hint: Assets-Liabilities over shares outstanding. It's greater than $20, when historic price to book rates are greater than 1.5 to 1. Easy answer. You should draw the same conclusions, or you know nothing about analysis.
Current market median Price to Book Ratio is 0.9 to 1. Meaning you could buy the entire market at its current price and keep the 1/.9 percentage profit for yourself. This implies bears don't have a reasonable and adequate basis on a valuation perspecitive.
I'll tell you , one of these days I expect Meredith Whitney to comment about this. She'll say something like, "But they're going to keep charging off assets directly to their equity." Well, why, then, is BAC posting a quarterly profit?
Either way, current Price to Book on BAC is 0.32, means book values is 32% of the current price. This is plain and stupid a retarded valuation of the market. Value will lead the charge upward, and a very simple filter right now will be those with the stupidest (ie:lowest) price to book values with profitable annual and quarterly earnings. This is essentially the future market not counting the few that will fail (ie:those that are still unprofitable at least on a quarterly basis).
Do you think a current price below book value is predictive of future price movements? If so, on what timescale, and with what maximum possible adverse price move down before the valuation finally causes the price to move back up.
Quote from Cutten:
Do you think a current price below book value is predictive of future price movements? If so, on what timescale, and with what maximum possible adverse price move down before the valuation finally causes the price to move back up.
Valuation is what has caused the rally, but, as most will admit, may not tell you "when" to buy. The rally off the lows is significant, so I'd venture to say it has already happened. The next part will be to see if we get growth out of earnings.
Quote from S2007S:
I have to sit back and laugh at you bulls.
The only catalyst for this market is the foolish bulls who continue to throw money into this market thinking an economic recovery is just a few moments away, sad, so very sad.
Think about the implications of profits for the banks. This is and will continue to be the catalyst, and for all the reasons I've stated including simple price to book ratios.
It is actually sellers who are the stupid ones for selling their stocks for less than they're worth valuation wise. Just stupid valuation with no analysis. Lots of emotion.
Some people didn't make money at all during this rally.
How is that possible?
You want to be rich or be right? Idiots. Oh .. wait, I forget.. you probably belong to the $25k accounts groupie.
Sad, so very sad!
YEEEHAA! New bull market will take us to at least 1080 on the S&P.. that's the minimum.
How is that possible?
You want to be rich or be right? Idiots. Oh .. wait, I forget.. you probably belong to the $25k accounts groupie.
Sad, so very sad!
YEEEHAA! New bull market will take us to at least 1080 on the S&P.. that's the minimum.
Quote from S2007S:
I have to sit back and laugh at you bulls.
The only catalyst for this market is the foolish bulls who continue to throw money into this market thinking an economic recovery is just a few moments away, sad, so very sad.
Quote from Cutten:
Do you think a current price below book value is predictive of future price movements? If so, on what timescale, and with what maximum possible adverse price move down before the valuation finally causes the price to move back up.
I'm trying to figure that one out, too. Benjamin Graham stated knowing when to buy and when to sell might be more important than what to buy and what to sell. At this point, the frame is quarterly, and may be monthly, as that is the timeframe for most fund managers. Adverse excursion on a market basis I can't determine at this time, but it is a sufficiently interesting question that we'll have the answer for in the next three years when we see what the market does. My opinion is that the bottom was last quarter, and the rally towards the end was based on valuation, and we're still rallying from it. Given that, quarterly looks like the best answer.
Ironically this has nothing to do with charts oncesoever.
tony soprano retires from the mob,billy graham is the new boss,he tells ,pudge,pussy and tucci, to go straight and fix everything,how do u think that plays out,the banks have been scheming for 15 yrs,they made a ton,now tony /billy/joebama/says this was a great scam,lets prop it up until it 's again profitable,r u guys in,lobbyists.banks,hedge funds,brokerage houses say ..hell ya...we are fucked brolinsky...this aint gonna workQuote from bwolinsky:
Think about the implications of profits for the banks. This is and will continue to be the catalyst, and for all the reasons I've stated including simple price to book ratios.
It is actually sellers who are the stupid ones for selling their stocks for less than they're worth valuation wise. Just stupid valuation with no analysis. Lots of emotion.
It's like these noobs are are trying anymore. I blame the internet generation. Bottom pickers are gonna get raped. Back in 03 you could be late to the bull party by more than haft a year and you could have still captured 75% of the upside.
Quote from ammo:
tony soprano retires from the mob,billy graham is the new boss,he tells ,pudge,pussy and tucci, to go straight and fix everything,how do u think that plays out,the banks have been scheming for 15 yrs,they made a ton,now tony /billy/joebama/says this was a great scam,lets prop it up until it 's again profitable,r u guys in,lobbyists.banks,hedge funds,brokerage houses say ..hell ya...we are fucked brolinsky...this aint gonna work
Of course with such a great command of financial acumen, how can I disagree?