The market was very quiet (read: dead) on Tuesday; or using Fed-speak, it was patient. Could it possibly get deader, or even more "patient?" Yes, Wednesday was ridiculously slow despite the release of the FOMC Minutes from its last meeting.
It were the minutes and headlines below that should have moved the market in the afternoon. It did not.
MANY FED OFFICIALS INCLINED TO STAY AT ZERO LONGER: MINUTES
MANY OFFICIALS FELT DROPPING `PATIENT' MAY LEAD TO DATE FOCUS
MANY FED OFFICIALS SAW RISKS IF FOREIGN WEAKNESS WORSENED
FED OFFICIALS AGREED POLICY SHOULD STAY DATA DEPENDENT
FED SAYS CONTINUED TEPID WAGE GROWTH COULD RESTRAIN SPENDING
FED EXPECTED STRONGER DOLLAR TO BE PERSISTENT DRAG ON EXPORTS
A FEW FED OFFICIALS NOTED RISK DOLLAR COULD STRENGTHEN FURTHER
FED MINUTES NOTED RISKS FROM CHINA, MIDEAST, UKRAINE, GREECE
FED OFFICIALS SAW RISKS TO OUTLOOK NEARLY BALANCED AT JAN. FOMC
FED OFFICIALS SAW RISKS TO OUTLOOK NEARLY BALANCED AT JAN. FOMC
A couple of key paragraphs in the text were...
Many participants indicated that their assessment of the balance of risks associated with the timing of the beginning of policy normalization had inclined them toward keeping the federal funds rate at its effective lower bound for a longer time.
...and...
There was wide agreement that it would be difficult to specify in advance an exhaustive list of economic indicators and the values that these indicators would need to take. Nonetheless, a number of participants suggested that they would need to see further improvement in labor market conditions and data pointing to continued growth in real activity at a pace sufficient to support additional labor market gains before beginning policy normalization.
In the first paragraph the Fed is saying that the risks in the system are making them keep rates low for even longer than expected. But this is odd for two reasons; the stock market sees NO risk whatsoever, and the president has assured us that "the shadow of crisis has passed." So are the market and the president wrong? What gives?
In the second paragraph, the Fed is admitting that it has no idea what data it will need to move on rates. It will simply know it when the time is right.
Trade well and follow the trend, not the perma-bull OR perma-bear "experts."
Behold the age of infinite moral hazard! On April 2nd, 2009 CONgress forced FASB to suspend rule 157 in favor of deceitful accounting for the TBTF banking mafia.
With the FOMC minutes release due out in the afternoon of yesterdays session, the market conditions were flat and trading volatility was almost nonexistent. When the minutes were finally released, the reaction was barely anything to write about and we chopped around into the close. With a dovish statements from the Fed, the markets were ho-hum and it was business as usual. The SPX is still offering up a short term resistance at the 2100 range, and we could shrink back a bit tomorrow. Look for a short term pullback tomorrow, but don't be surprised if we chop around more during the session. That has been the case as of late, and if the FOMC can't shake up the markets, then what can?
Traders have different risk tolerances. It's a simple fact of human nature. Is it better to be more or less risk averse? I get that question often from our students. The answer is this: it is neither better nor worse to have higher or lower risk tolerances. The key here is this: you can't be a part-time member of either club! You cannot choose one day to be risky and one day to apply a different set of rules. You might as well not employ any rules at all. What needs to be understood is that if you are going to employ "riskier" management rules you are going to experience greater variance in your results. There is one caveat that is pretty specific to the type of options trading we do. It is OK to have a different set of rules for the different types of trades we do. We do three main types of trades: directional (earnings), directional (non-earnings) and IV-regression. All three of these should and do have different risk management associated with them. A directional trade within an earnings construct will most likely be binary in nature. We will either max out the spread or lose the entire premium almost immediately. You must take the nature of the risk into consideration. A non-earnings directional move will most likely have a more measured type of move. So, it is completely appropriate to apply different management rules here. Same thing with an IV-regression signal.
Watch how our instructors call out live signals, answer questions, provide detailed commentary and compare notes with fellow students. Our live classrooms offer training on all markets - where you can watch the exact techniques our top instructors use with simple, yet complete explanations of every move they make in real time.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Keep a civil tongue.