The Stock Market Hasn’t Been This Placid in Years

128
27
Favorite

The Stock Market Hasn’t Been This Placid in Years

WSJ2021-06-28

The U.S. stock marketis as calm as can beon the surface, while churning underneath more than it has in decades. The S&P 500 is so quiet it is almost disconcerting. The index hasn’t had a 5% correction...

Source Link

Disclaimer: Investing carries risk. This is not financial advice. The above content should not be regarded as an offer, recommendation, or solicitation on acquiring or disposing of any financial products, any associated discussions, comments, or posts by author or other users should not be considered as such either. It is solely for general information purpose only, which does not consider your own investment objectives, financial situations or needs. TTM assumes no responsibility or warranty for the accuracy and completeness of the information, investors should do their own research and may seek professional advice before investing.

128

Report

Comment（27）

CZZZ
·2021-06-28
Good news to hear
Reply
2
Report
Aloysius9999
·2021-06-28
Hi
Reply
1
Report
Fold Replies
- Aloysius9999:
  Hello
  2021-06-28
  Reply
  Report
CZZZ
·2021-06-28
Great
Reply
1
Report
szueyann
·2021-06-28
Please like and comment. Thanks
Reply
4
Report
Fold Replies
- gorgonzola:
  done. please like and comment back. Thanks!
  2021-06-28
  Reply
  Report
tiototo
·2021-06-28
Agree..
Reply
4
Report
MaeTan
·2021-06-28
Is this the calm before the storm? When will the storm start? How bad will the storm be? So many questions in my mind....
Reply
9
Report
Fold Replies
- MaddyLIM:
  Buy the dips!
  2021-07-01
  Reply
  Report
- SandDust:
  Stay invested. Keep some money aside for the dip
  2021-06-28
  Reply
  Report
- Ella12345:
  Ok
  2021-06-28
  Reply
  Report
View more 1 comments
TweetyCSL
·2021-06-28
Like
Reply
4
Report
Fold Replies
- Ella12345:
  Okdjsjwjw
  2021-06-28
  Reply
  Report
Aun9
·2021-06-28
Scary
Reply
11
Report
Mel_888
·2021-06-28
Yes
Reply
4
Report
YIPKF
·2021-06-28
Good
Reply
4
Report
Accccececdid
·2021-06-28
Like n comment
Reply
3
Report
Fold Replies
- szueyann:
  ok
  2021-06-28
  Reply
  Report
- Fiona888:
  ok
  2021-06-28
  Reply
  Report
BBBBBBBBBB
·2021-06-28
Why
Reply
5
Report
Fold Replies
- PanaCota:
  ok
  2021-06-29
  Reply
  Report
- PanaCota:
  ok
  2021-06-28
  Reply
  Report
Kaka1992
·2021-06-28
Yes
Reply
3
Report
Fold Replies
- Accccececdid:
  Like n comment
  2021-06-28
  Reply
  Report
Canokira
·2021-06-28
Nice
Reply
1
Report
TheIronCarro
·2021-06-28
No
Reply
3
Report
yvneyng
·2021-06-28
Like and comment pls:)
Reply
4
Report
Fold Replies
- szueyann:
  ok
  2021-06-28
  Reply
  Report
- sugizoi4u:
  Done
  2021-06-28
  Reply
  Report
SmallFishinS
·2021-06-28
Ok
Reply
1
Report
Jarkkhron
·2021-06-28
Like
Reply
1
Report
edgewise
·2021-06-28
Buy or sell?
Reply
1
Report
Johnlimwt
·2021-06-28
Like please and thanks
Reply
2
Report
Fold Replies
- szueyann:
  ok
  2021-06-28
  Reply
  Report

Most Discussed

7x24

All

Terms and Conditions·Privacy Policy

Company: TTMF Limited. Tech supported by Xiangshang Yixin.

Email：uservice@ttm.financial

{"i18n":{"language":"en_US"},"data":{"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/1177492181?lang=en_US&edition=fundamental","thumbnail":"","is_english":true,"pubTime":"2021-06-28 11:08","share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","id":"1177492181","market":"us","top_or_hot":-1,"title":"The Stock Market Hasn’t Been This Placid in Years","media":"WSJ","content":"<div>\n<p>The U.S. stock marketis as calm as can beon the surface, while churning underneath more than it has in decades.\nThe S&P 500 is so quiet it is almost disconcerting. The index hasn’t had a 5% correction...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-stock-market-hasnt-been-this-placid-in-years-11624740199?mod=itp_wsj\">Source Link</a>\n\n</div>\n","source":null,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>The Stock Market Hasn’t Been This Placid in Years</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 11px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;line-height: 11px;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nThe Stock Market Hasn’t Been This Placid in Years\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-06-28 11:08 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-stock-market-hasnt-been-this-placid-in-years-11624740199?mod=itp_wsj><strong>WSJ</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>The U.S. stock marketis as calm as can beon the surface, while churning underneath more than it has in decades.\nThe S&P 500 is so quiet it is almost disconcerting. The index hasn’t had a 5% correction...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-stock-market-hasnt-been-this-placid-in-years-11624740199?mod=itp_wsj\">Source Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","isBrief":false,"type":0,"news_type":1,"symbol":".DJI","symbol_name":"道琼斯","start_time":0,"source_url":"https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-stock-market-hasnt-been-this-placid-in-years-11624740199?mod=itp_wsj","article_id":"1177492181","we_media_id":null,"thumbnails":[],"rights":null,"url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1177492181","pubTimestamp":1624849703,"columns":[],"sourceInfo":null,"weMediaInfo":null,"summary":"The U.S. stock marketis as calm as can beon the surface, while churning underneath more than it has ","collect":0,"end_time":0,"defaultTopTitle":"wsj.com","property":[],"viewcount":null,"language":"en","relate_stocks":{".DJI":"道琼斯"},"translate_title":"股票市场多年来从未如此平静过","themeId":null,"isJumpTheme":false,"ttsUrl":null,"symbols_score_info":{".DJI":0.9},"content_text":"The U.S. stock marketis as calm as can beon the surface, while churning underneath more than it has in decades.\nThe S&P 500 is so quiet it is almost disconcerting. The index hasn’t had a 5% correction based on closing prices since the end of October; no wonder the new day traders who started buying shares in lockdown think the market only goes up. The last time the S&P was this serene for so long was in 2017, a period of calm that ended with the volatility crash early in 2018—although back then it was even quieter for much longer.\nYet, look at the performance of types of stocks, and they have been swinging around much more than they usually do. Investors have been switching their bets between industries at a pace not seen outside of crises; March brought the biggest gap between the best and worst-performing sectors since 2002.\nThe link between moves in growth stocks and cheap “value” stocks is the weakest—measured by the correlation—since 1995; investors are using them as proxies for betting for or against economic recovery.\nMeanwhile, big and small stocks last moved so independently of each other during the dot-com bubble of 2000, never a reassuring sign.\nI think this is another aspect of TINA: There Is No Alternative to stocks. With Treasurys, corporate bonds and cashoffering meager or zero return, stocks offer the best hope of gains. Investors who would previously have shifted money from stocks to bonds or vice versa now just switch from one sort of stock to another—so falls in one are offset by gains in another.\nThere is no guarantee that it continues this way, of course. Bring enough fear into play and investors will bolt for the exits no matter how low cash yields are, just as they did in March last year. But while times seem pretty good, it is hard to justify buying a long-dated bond yielding far less than inflation. And times do seem pretty good.\nA widespread theory among those of a cautious disposition is that stocks just keep going up because a massive bubble has been inflated by cheap money and government stimulus. Stocks haven’t been so expensive since 2000, while a bubble mentality is obvious in the wild overtrading of fashionable stocks. A cluster of small stocks popular with retail tradershas often featured at the topof the most-traded lists this year, notablyGameStopandAMC Entertainmentbut also favorites such as Virgin Galactic andBlackBerry.\nIt is undeniable that stocks are far more expensive than usual. But bubbles usually involve lots of volatility as they inflate, not a calm exterior and turmoil within, because every little price drop is magnified by others fearful that the bubble is about to pop. In 1999 there were at least nine drops of more than 5% in the S&P 500, and from its intraday peak in July to the October low it fell 13%.\nThis time the most obvious threat to stocks is the Federal Reserve, rather than the market’s overvaluation. If the Fed raises rates, cash and bonds suddenly look much more attractive, and the TINA justification for buying extraordinarily expensive stocks is undermined.\n“You’ve got lots of volatility within the market but not a lot of volatility of the market,” says Robert Buckland, chief global equity strategist at Citigroup. “If there’s an alternative to just owning the index that could change.”\nThis month’s Fed scare showed just how sensitive stock prices are when it turns out there is an alternative to stocks, of sorts. The Fedraised rates fractionally off the floorby offering 0.05% instead of 0% on its cash-absorbing reverse repurchase agreements, a kind of overnight secured deposit, and instantly sucked in $235 billion extra. Talk of rate increases coming in two years instead of the three previously projected added to pressure on stocks, and the S&P fell just over 2% in three days before resuming its upward climb.\nIf that was the reaction to the Fed just barely doing something close to nothing, imagine how scared the market would be if the Fed started a normal rate hiking cycle and made cash attractive again. It isn’t something I think is likely soon, but the number one threat that could bring the turmoil from the depths to the surface of this market is the Fed.","kind":"news","is_publish_news":true,"is_publish_highlight":true,"is_publish_live":false,"is_publish_wemedia":null,"editions":null,"column":"","sentiment":"0","news_tag":"","news_rank":0,"symbols":[],"gpt_button":1},"commentList":[{"id":127529497,"gmtCreate":1624857635219,"gmtModify":1703846362412,"author":{"id":"3557771988371061","authorId":"3557771988371061","name":"CZZZ","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/82ceb88cfbcdec3fd58e2b516b00eaa5","vip":1,"crmLevel":1,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"idStr":"3557771988371061","authorIdStr":"3557771988371061"},"htmlText":"Good news to hear","listText":"Good news to hear","text":"Good news to hear","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":2,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/127529497","repostId":1177492181,"repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1177492181","kind":"news","pubTimestamp":1624849703,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/1177492181?lang=&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2021-06-28 11:08","market":"us","language":"en","title":"The Stock Market Hasn’t Been This Placid in Years","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1177492181","media":"WSJ","summary":"The U.S. stock marketis as calm as can beon the surface, while churning underneath more than it has ","content":"<p>The U.S. stock marketis as calm as can beon the surface, while churning underneath more than it has in decades.</p>\n<p>The S&amp;P 500 is so quiet it is almost disconcerting. The index hasn’t had a 5% correction based on closing prices since the end of October; no wonder the new day traders who started buying shares in lockdown think the market only goes up. The last time the S&amp;P was this serene for so long was in 2017, a period of calm that ended with the volatility crash early in 2018—although back then it was even quieter for much longer.</p>\n<p>Yet, look at the performance of types of stocks, and they have been swinging around much more than they usually do. Investors have been switching their bets between industries at a pace not seen outside of crises; March brought the biggest gap between the best and worst-performing sectors since 2002.</p>\n<p>The link between moves in growth stocks and cheap “value” stocks is the weakest—measured by the correlation—since 1995; investors are using them as proxies for betting for or against economic recovery.</p>\n<p>Meanwhile, big and small stocks last moved so independently of each other during the dot-com bubble of 2000, never a reassuring sign.</p>\n<p>I think this is another aspect of TINA: There Is No Alternative to stocks. With Treasurys, corporate bonds and cashoffering meager or zero return, stocks offer the best hope of gains. Investors who would previously have shifted money from stocks to bonds or vice versa now just switch from one sort of stock to another—so falls in one are offset by gains in another.</p>\n<p>There is no guarantee that it continues this way, of course. Bring enough fear into play and investors will bolt for the exits no matter how low cash yields are, just as they did in March last year. But while times seem pretty good, it is hard to justify buying a long-dated bond yielding far less than inflation. And times do seem pretty good.</p>\n<p>A widespread theory among those of a cautious disposition is that stocks just keep going up because a massive bubble has been inflated by cheap money and government stimulus. Stocks haven’t been so expensive since 2000, while a bubble mentality is obvious in the wild overtrading of fashionable stocks. A cluster of small stocks popular with retail tradershas often featured at the topof the most-traded lists this year, notablyGameStopandAMC Entertainmentbut also favorites such as Virgin Galactic andBlackBerry.</p>\n<p>It is undeniable that stocks are far more expensive than usual. But bubbles usually involve lots of volatility as they inflate, not a calm exterior and turmoil within, because every little price drop is magnified by others fearful that the bubble is about to pop. In 1999 there were at least nine drops of more than 5% in the S&amp;P 500, and from its intraday peak in July to the October low it fell 13%.</p>\n<p>This time the most obvious threat to stocks is the Federal Reserve, rather than the market’s overvaluation. If the Fed raises rates, cash and bonds suddenly look much more attractive, and the TINA justification for buying extraordinarily expensive stocks is undermined.</p>\n<p>“You’ve got lots of volatility within the market but not a lot of volatility of the market,” says Robert Buckland, chief global equity strategist at Citigroup. “If there’s an alternative to just owning the index that could change.”</p>\n<p>This month’s Fed scare showed just how sensitive stock prices are when it turns out there is an alternative to stocks, of sorts. The Fedraised rates fractionally off the floorby offering 0.05% instead of 0% on its cash-absorbing reverse repurchase agreements, a kind of overnight secured deposit, and instantly sucked in $235 billion extra. Talk of rate increases coming in two years instead of the three previously projected added to pressure on stocks, and the S&amp;P fell just over 2% in three days before resuming its upward climb.</p>\n<p>If that was the reaction to the Fed just barely doing something close to nothing, imagine how scared the market would be if the Fed started a normal rate hiking cycle and made cash attractive again. It isn’t something I think is likely soon, but the number one threat that could bring the turmoil from the depths to the surface of this market is the Fed.</p>","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>The Stock Market Hasn’t Been This Placid in Years</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 11px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;line-height: 11px;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nThe Stock Market Hasn’t Been This Placid in Years\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-06-28 11:08 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-stock-market-hasnt-been-this-placid-in-years-11624740199?mod=itp_wsj><strong>WSJ</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>The U.S. stock marketis as calm as can beon the surface, while churning underneath more than it has in decades.\nThe S&P 500 is so quiet it is almost disconcerting. The index hasn’t had a 5% correction...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-stock-market-hasnt-been-this-placid-in-years-11624740199?mod=itp_wsj\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{".DJI":"道琼斯"},"source_url":"https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-stock-market-hasnt-been-this-placid-in-years-11624740199?mod=itp_wsj","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1177492181","content_text":"The U.S. stock marketis as calm as can beon the surface, while churning underneath more than it has in decades.\nThe S&P 500 is so quiet it is almost disconcerting. The index hasn’t had a 5% correction based on closing prices since the end of October; no wonder the new day traders who started buying shares in lockdown think the market only goes up. The last time the S&P was this serene for so long was in 2017, a period of calm that ended with the volatility crash early in 2018—although back then it was even quieter for much longer.\nYet, look at the performance of types of stocks, and they have been swinging around much more than they usually do. Investors have been switching their bets between industries at a pace not seen outside of crises; March brought the biggest gap between the best and worst-performing sectors since 2002.\nThe link between moves in growth stocks and cheap “value” stocks is the weakest—measured by the correlation—since 1995; investors are using them as proxies for betting for or against economic recovery.\nMeanwhile, big and small stocks last moved so independently of each other during the dot-com bubble of 2000, never a reassuring sign.\nI think this is another aspect of TINA: There Is No Alternative to stocks. With Treasurys, corporate bonds and cashoffering meager or zero return, stocks offer the best hope of gains. Investors who would previously have shifted money from stocks to bonds or vice versa now just switch from one sort of stock to another—so falls in one are offset by gains in another.\nThere is no guarantee that it continues this way, of course. Bring enough fear into play and investors will bolt for the exits no matter how low cash yields are, just as they did in March last year. But while times seem pretty good, it is hard to justify buying a long-dated bond yielding far less than inflation. And times do seem pretty good.\nA widespread theory among those of a cautious disposition is that stocks just keep going up because a massive bubble has been inflated by cheap money and government stimulus. Stocks haven’t been so expensive since 2000, while a bubble mentality is obvious in the wild overtrading of fashionable stocks. A cluster of small stocks popular with retail tradershas often featured at the topof the most-traded lists this year, notablyGameStopandAMC Entertainmentbut also favorites such as Virgin Galactic andBlackBerry.\nIt is undeniable that stocks are far more expensive than usual. But bubbles usually involve lots of volatility as they inflate, not a calm exterior and turmoil within, because every little price drop is magnified by others fearful that the bubble is about to pop. In 1999 there were at least nine drops of more than 5% in the S&P 500, and from its intraday peak in July to the October low it fell 13%.\nThis time the most obvious threat to stocks is the Federal Reserve, rather than the market’s overvaluation. If the Fed raises rates, cash and bonds suddenly look much more attractive, and the TINA justification for buying extraordinarily expensive stocks is undermined.\n“You’ve got lots of volatility within the market but not a lot of volatility of the market,” says Robert Buckland, chief global equity strategist at Citigroup. “If there’s an alternative to just owning the index that could change.”\nThis month’s Fed scare showed just how sensitive stock prices are when it turns out there is an alternative to stocks, of sorts. The Fedraised rates fractionally off the floorby offering 0.05% instead of 0% on its cash-absorbing reverse repurchase agreements, a kind of overnight secured deposit, and instantly sucked in $235 billion extra. Talk of rate increases coming in two years instead of the three previously projected added to pressure on stocks, and the S&P fell just over 2% in three days before resuming its upward climb.\nIf that was the reaction to the Fed just barely doing something close to nothing, imagine how scared the market would be if the Fed started a normal rate hiking cycle and made cash attractive again. It isn’t something I think is likely soon, but the number one threat that could bring the turmoil from the depths to the surface of this market is the Fed.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"likeStatus":false,"favoriteStatus":false,"reportStatus":false,"tweetType":1,"langContent":"EN"},{"id":127529249,"gmtCreate":1624857627481,"gmtModify":1703846361918,"author":{"id":"3581635727731262","authorId":"3581635727731262","name":"Aloysius9999","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","vip":1,"crmLevel":1,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"idStr":"3581635727731262","authorIdStr":"3581635727731262"},"htmlText":"Hi","listText":"Hi","text":"Hi","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":1,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/127529249","repostId":1177492181,"repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1177492181","kind":"news","pubTimestamp":1624849703,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/1177492181?lang=&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2021-06-28 11:08","market":"us","language":"en","title":"The Stock Market Hasn’t Been This Placid in Years","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1177492181","media":"WSJ","summary":"The U.S. stock marketis as calm as can beon the surface, while churning underneath more than it has ","content":"<p>The U.S. stock marketis as calm as can beon the surface, while churning underneath more than it has in decades.</p>\n<p>The S&amp;P 500 is so quiet it is almost disconcerting. The index hasn’t had a 5% correction based on closing prices since the end of October; no wonder the new day traders who started buying shares in lockdown think the market only goes up. The last time the S&amp;P was this serene for so long was in 2017, a period of calm that ended with the volatility crash early in 2018—although back then it was even quieter for much longer.</p>\n<p>Yet, look at the performance of types of stocks, and they have been swinging around much more than they usually do. Investors have been switching their bets between industries at a pace not seen outside of crises; March brought the biggest gap between the best and worst-performing sectors since 2002.</p>\n<p>The link between moves in growth stocks and cheap “value” stocks is the weakest—measured by the correlation—since 1995; investors are using them as proxies for betting for or against economic recovery.</p>\n<p>Meanwhile, big and small stocks last moved so independently of each other during the dot-com bubble of 2000, never a reassuring sign.</p>\n<p>I think this is another aspect of TINA: There Is No Alternative to stocks. With Treasurys, corporate bonds and cashoffering meager or zero return, stocks offer the best hope of gains. Investors who would previously have shifted money from stocks to bonds or vice versa now just switch from one sort of stock to another—so falls in one are offset by gains in another.</p>\n<p>There is no guarantee that it continues this way, of course. Bring enough fear into play and investors will bolt for the exits no matter how low cash yields are, just as they did in March last year. But while times seem pretty good, it is hard to justify buying a long-dated bond yielding far less than inflation. And times do seem pretty good.</p>\n<p>A widespread theory among those of a cautious disposition is that stocks just keep going up because a massive bubble has been inflated by cheap money and government stimulus. Stocks haven’t been so expensive since 2000, while a bubble mentality is obvious in the wild overtrading of fashionable stocks. A cluster of small stocks popular with retail tradershas often featured at the topof the most-traded lists this year, notablyGameStopandAMC Entertainmentbut also favorites such as Virgin Galactic andBlackBerry.</p>\n<p>It is undeniable that stocks are far more expensive than usual. But bubbles usually involve lots of volatility as they inflate, not a calm exterior and turmoil within, because every little price drop is magnified by others fearful that the bubble is about to pop. In 1999 there were at least nine drops of more than 5% in the S&amp;P 500, and from its intraday peak in July to the October low it fell 13%.</p>\n<p>This time the most obvious threat to stocks is the Federal Reserve, rather than the market’s overvaluation. If the Fed raises rates, cash and bonds suddenly look much more attractive, and the TINA justification for buying extraordinarily expensive stocks is undermined.</p>\n<p>“You’ve got lots of volatility within the market but not a lot of volatility of the market,” says Robert Buckland, chief global equity strategist at Citigroup. “If there’s an alternative to just owning the index that could change.”</p>\n<p>This month’s Fed scare showed just how sensitive stock prices are when it turns out there is an alternative to stocks, of sorts. The Fedraised rates fractionally off the floorby offering 0.05% instead of 0% on its cash-absorbing reverse repurchase agreements, a kind of overnight secured deposit, and instantly sucked in $235 billion extra. Talk of rate increases coming in two years instead of the three previously projected added to pressure on stocks, and the S&amp;P fell just over 2% in three days before resuming its upward climb.</p>\n<p>If that was the reaction to the Fed just barely doing something close to nothing, imagine how scared the market would be if the Fed started a normal rate hiking cycle and made cash attractive again. It isn’t something I think is likely soon, but the number one threat that could bring the turmoil from the depths to the surface of this market is the Fed.</p>","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>The Stock Market Hasn’t Been This Placid in Years</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 11px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;line-height: 11px;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nThe Stock Market Hasn’t Been This Placid in Years\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-06-28 11:08 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-stock-market-hasnt-been-this-placid-in-years-11624740199?mod=itp_wsj><strong>WSJ</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>The U.S. stock marketis as calm as can beon the surface, while churning underneath more than it has in decades.\nThe S&P 500 is so quiet it is almost disconcerting. The index hasn’t had a 5% correction...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-stock-market-hasnt-been-this-placid-in-years-11624740199?mod=itp_wsj\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{".DJI":"道琼斯"},"source_url":"https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-stock-market-hasnt-been-this-placid-in-years-11624740199?mod=itp_wsj","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1177492181","content_text":"The U.S. stock marketis as calm as can beon the surface, while churning underneath more than it has in decades.\nThe S&P 500 is so quiet it is almost disconcerting. The index hasn’t had a 5% correction based on closing prices since the end of October; no wonder the new day traders who started buying shares in lockdown think the market only goes up. The last time the S&P was this serene for so long was in 2017, a period of calm that ended with the volatility crash early in 2018—although back then it was even quieter for much longer.\nYet, look at the performance of types of stocks, and they have been swinging around much more than they usually do. Investors have been switching their bets between industries at a pace not seen outside of crises; March brought the biggest gap between the best and worst-performing sectors since 2002.\nThe link between moves in growth stocks and cheap “value” stocks is the weakest—measured by the correlation—since 1995; investors are using them as proxies for betting for or against economic recovery.\nMeanwhile, big and small stocks last moved so independently of each other during the dot-com bubble of 2000, never a reassuring sign.\nI think this is another aspect of TINA: There Is No Alternative to stocks. With Treasurys, corporate bonds and cashoffering meager or zero return, stocks offer the best hope of gains. Investors who would previously have shifted money from stocks to bonds or vice versa now just switch from one sort of stock to another—so falls in one are offset by gains in another.\nThere is no guarantee that it continues this way, of course. Bring enough fear into play and investors will bolt for the exits no matter how low cash yields are, just as they did in March last year. But while times seem pretty good, it is hard to justify buying a long-dated bond yielding far less than inflation. And times do seem pretty good.\nA widespread theory among those of a cautious disposition is that stocks just keep going up because a massive bubble has been inflated by cheap money and government stimulus. Stocks haven’t been so expensive since 2000, while a bubble mentality is obvious in the wild overtrading of fashionable stocks. A cluster of small stocks popular with retail tradershas often featured at the topof the most-traded lists this year, notablyGameStopandAMC Entertainmentbut also favorites such as Virgin Galactic andBlackBerry.\nIt is undeniable that stocks are far more expensive than usual. But bubbles usually involve lots of volatility as they inflate, not a calm exterior and turmoil within, because every little price drop is magnified by others fearful that the bubble is about to pop. In 1999 there were at least nine drops of more than 5% in the S&P 500, and from its intraday peak in July to the October low it fell 13%.\nThis time the most obvious threat to stocks is the Federal Reserve, rather than the market’s overvaluation. If the Fed raises rates, cash and bonds suddenly look much more attractive, and the TINA justification for buying extraordinarily expensive stocks is undermined.\n“You’ve got lots of volatility within the market but not a lot of volatility of the market,” says Robert Buckland, chief global equity strategist at Citigroup. “If there’s an alternative to just owning the index that could change.”\nThis month’s Fed scare showed just how sensitive stock prices are when it turns out there is an alternative to stocks, of sorts. The Fedraised rates fractionally off the floorby offering 0.05% instead of 0% on its cash-absorbing reverse repurchase agreements, a kind of overnight secured deposit, and instantly sucked in $235 billion extra. Talk of rate increases coming in two years instead of the three previously projected added to pressure on stocks, and the S&P fell just over 2% in three days before resuming its upward climb.\nIf that was the reaction to the Fed just barely doing something close to nothing, imagine how scared the market would be if the Fed started a normal rate hiking cycle and made cash attractive again. It isn’t something I think is likely soon, but the number one threat that could bring the turmoil from the depths to the surface of this market is the Fed.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"likeStatus":false,"favoriteStatus":false,"reportStatus":false,"tweetType":1,"comments":[{"id":5048834,"gmtCreate":1624857638145,"gmtModify":1663230178026,"authorId":3581635727731262,"author":{"id":3581635727731262,"idStr":"3581635727731262","authorId":3581635727731262,"name":"Aloysius9999","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","vip":1,"crmLevel":1,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"individualDisplayBadges":[]},"repliedAuthorId":0,"objectId":127529249,"type":1,"supId":0,"prevId":0,"content":"Hello","text":"Hello","html":"Hello"}],"langContent":"EN"},{"id":127564612,"gmtCreate":1624857445336,"gmtModify":1703846357158,"author":{"id":"3557771988371061","authorId":"3557771988371061","name":"CZZZ","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/82ceb88cfbcdec3fd58e2b516b00eaa5","vip":1,"crmLevel":1,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"idStr":"3557771988371061","authorIdStr":"3557771988371061"},"htmlText":"Great&nbsp;","listText":"Great&nbsp;","text":"Great","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/127564612","repostId":1177492181,"repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1177492181","kind":"news","pubTimestamp":1624849703,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/1177492181?lang=&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2021-06-28 11:08","market":"us","language":"en","title":"The Stock Market Hasn’t Been This Placid in Years","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1177492181","media":"WSJ","summary":"The U.S. stock marketis as calm as can beon the surface, while churning underneath more than it has ","content":"<p>The U.S. stock marketis as calm as can beon the surface, while churning underneath more than it has in decades.</p>\n<p>The S&amp;P 500 is so quiet it is almost disconcerting. The index hasn’t had a 5% correction based on closing prices since the end of October; no wonder the new day traders who started buying shares in lockdown think the market only goes up. The last time the S&amp;P was this serene for so long was in 2017, a period of calm that ended with the volatility crash early in 2018—although back then it was even quieter for much longer.</p>\n<p>Yet, look at the performance of types of stocks, and they have been swinging around much more than they usually do. Investors have been switching their bets between industries at a pace not seen outside of crises; March brought the biggest gap between the best and worst-performing sectors since 2002.</p>\n<p>The link between moves in growth stocks and cheap “value” stocks is the weakest—measured by the correlation—since 1995; investors are using them as proxies for betting for or against economic recovery.</p>\n<p>Meanwhile, big and small stocks last moved so independently of each other during the dot-com bubble of 2000, never a reassuring sign.</p>\n<p>I think this is another aspect of TINA: There Is No Alternative to stocks. With Treasurys, corporate bonds and cashoffering meager or zero return, stocks offer the best hope of gains. Investors who would previously have shifted money from stocks to bonds or vice versa now just switch from one sort of stock to another—so falls in one are offset by gains in another.</p>\n<p>There is no guarantee that it continues this way, of course. Bring enough fear into play and investors will bolt for the exits no matter how low cash yields are, just as they did in March last year. But while times seem pretty good, it is hard to justify buying a long-dated bond yielding far less than inflation. And times do seem pretty good.</p>\n<p>A widespread theory among those of a cautious disposition is that stocks just keep going up because a massive bubble has been inflated by cheap money and government stimulus. Stocks haven’t been so expensive since 2000, while a bubble mentality is obvious in the wild overtrading of fashionable stocks. A cluster of small stocks popular with retail tradershas often featured at the topof the most-traded lists this year, notablyGameStopandAMC Entertainmentbut also favorites such as Virgin Galactic andBlackBerry.</p>\n<p>It is undeniable that stocks are far more expensive than usual. But bubbles usually involve lots of volatility as they inflate, not a calm exterior and turmoil within, because every little price drop is magnified by others fearful that the bubble is about to pop. In 1999 there were at least nine drops of more than 5% in the S&amp;P 500, and from its intraday peak in July to the October low it fell 13%.</p>\n<p>This time the most obvious threat to stocks is the Federal Reserve, rather than the market’s overvaluation. If the Fed raises rates, cash and bonds suddenly look much more attractive, and the TINA justification for buying extraordinarily expensive stocks is undermined.</p>\n<p>“You’ve got lots of volatility within the market but not a lot of volatility of the market,” says Robert Buckland, chief global equity strategist at Citigroup. “If there’s an alternative to just owning the index that could change.”</p>\n<p>This month’s Fed scare showed just how sensitive stock prices are when it turns out there is an alternative to stocks, of sorts. The Fedraised rates fractionally off the floorby offering 0.05% instead of 0% on its cash-absorbing reverse repurchase agreements, a kind of overnight secured deposit, and instantly sucked in $235 billion extra. Talk of rate increases coming in two years instead of the three previously projected added to pressure on stocks, and the S&amp;P fell just over 2% in three days before resuming its upward climb.</p>\n<p>If that was the reaction to the Fed just barely doing something close to nothing, imagine how scared the market would be if the Fed started a normal rate hiking cycle and made cash attractive again. It isn’t something I think is likely soon, but the number one threat that could bring the turmoil from the depths to the surface of this market is the Fed.</p>","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>The Stock Market Hasn’t Been This Placid in Years</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 11px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;line-height: 11px;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nThe Stock Market Hasn’t Been This Placid in Years\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-06-28 11:08 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-stock-market-hasnt-been-this-placid-in-years-11624740199?mod=itp_wsj><strong>WSJ</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>The U.S. stock marketis as calm as can beon the surface, while churning underneath more than it has in decades.\nThe S&P 500 is so quiet it is almost disconcerting. The index hasn’t had a 5% correction...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-stock-market-hasnt-been-this-placid-in-years-11624740199?mod=itp_wsj\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{".DJI":"道琼斯"},"source_url":"https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-stock-market-hasnt-been-this-placid-in-years-11624740199?mod=itp_wsj","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1177492181","content_text":"The U.S. stock marketis as calm as can beon the surface, while churning underneath more than it has in decades.\nThe S&P 500 is so quiet it is almost disconcerting. The index hasn’t had a 5% correction based on closing prices since the end of October; no wonder the new day traders who started buying shares in lockdown think the market only goes up. The last time the S&P was this serene for so long was in 2017, a period of calm that ended with the volatility crash early in 2018—although back then it was even quieter for much longer.\nYet, look at the performance of types of stocks, and they have been swinging around much more than they usually do. Investors have been switching their bets between industries at a pace not seen outside of crises; March brought the biggest gap between the best and worst-performing sectors since 2002.\nThe link between moves in growth stocks and cheap “value” stocks is the weakest—measured by the correlation—since 1995; investors are using them as proxies for betting for or against economic recovery.\nMeanwhile, big and small stocks last moved so independently of each other during the dot-com bubble of 2000, never a reassuring sign.\nI think this is another aspect of TINA: There Is No Alternative to stocks. With Treasurys, corporate bonds and cashoffering meager or zero return, stocks offer the best hope of gains. Investors who would previously have shifted money from stocks to bonds or vice versa now just switch from one sort of stock to another—so falls in one are offset by gains in another.\nThere is no guarantee that it continues this way, of course. Bring enough fear into play and investors will bolt for the exits no matter how low cash yields are, just as they did in March last year. But while times seem pretty good, it is hard to justify buying a long-dated bond yielding far less than inflation. And times do seem pretty good.\nA widespread theory among those of a cautious disposition is that stocks just keep going up because a massive bubble has been inflated by cheap money and government stimulus. Stocks haven’t been so expensive since 2000, while a bubble mentality is obvious in the wild overtrading of fashionable stocks. A cluster of small stocks popular with retail tradershas often featured at the topof the most-traded lists this year, notablyGameStopandAMC Entertainmentbut also favorites such as Virgin Galactic andBlackBerry.\nIt is undeniable that stocks are far more expensive than usual. But bubbles usually involve lots of volatility as they inflate, not a calm exterior and turmoil within, because every little price drop is magnified by others fearful that the bubble is about to pop. In 1999 there were at least nine drops of more than 5% in the S&P 500, and from its intraday peak in July to the October low it fell 13%.\nThis time the most obvious threat to stocks is the Federal Reserve, rather than the market’s overvaluation. If the Fed raises rates, cash and bonds suddenly look much more attractive, and the TINA justification for buying extraordinarily expensive stocks is undermined.\n“You’ve got lots of volatility within the market but not a lot of volatility of the market,” says Robert Buckland, chief global equity strategist at Citigroup. “If there’s an alternative to just owning the index that could change.”\nThis month’s Fed scare showed just how sensitive stock prices are when it turns out there is an alternative to stocks, of sorts. The Fedraised rates fractionally off the floorby offering 0.05% instead of 0% on its cash-absorbing reverse repurchase agreements, a kind of overnight secured deposit, and instantly sucked in $235 billion extra. Talk of rate increases coming in two years instead of the three previously projected added to pressure on stocks, and the S&P fell just over 2% in three days before resuming its upward climb.\nIf that was the reaction to the Fed just barely doing something close to nothing, imagine how scared the market would be if the Fed started a normal rate hiking cycle and made cash attractive again. It isn’t something I think is likely soon, but the number one threat that could bring the turmoil from the depths to the surface of this market is the Fed.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"likeStatus":false,"favoriteStatus":false,"reportStatus":false,"tweetType":1,"langContent":"EN"},{"id":127560317,"gmtCreate":1624857019239,"gmtModify":1703846348830,"author":{"id":"3573721781255613","authorId":"3573721781255613","name":"szueyann","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/cba9c6b1e785a9cf7301a7e6a2ff2354","vip":1,"crmLevel":2,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"idStr":"3573721781255613","authorIdStr":"3573721781255613"},"htmlText":"Please like and comment. Thanks","listText":"Please like and comment. Thanks","text":"Please like and comment. Thanks","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":4,"commentSize":1,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/127560317","repostId":1177492181,"repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1177492181","kind":"news","pubTimestamp":1624849703,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/1177492181?lang=&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2021-06-28 11:08","market":"us","language":"en","title":"The Stock Market Hasn’t Been This Placid in Years","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1177492181","media":"WSJ","summary":"The U.S. stock marketis as calm as can beon the surface, while churning underneath more than it has ","content":"<p>The U.S. stock marketis as calm as can beon the surface, while churning underneath more than it has in decades.</p>\n<p>The S&amp;P 500 is so quiet it is almost disconcerting. The index hasn’t had a 5% correction based on closing prices since the end of October; no wonder the new day traders who started buying shares in lockdown think the market only goes up. The last time the S&amp;P was this serene for so long was in 2017, a period of calm that ended with the volatility crash early in 2018—although back then it was even quieter for much longer.</p>\n<p>Yet, look at the performance of types of stocks, and they have been swinging around much more than they usually do. Investors have been switching their bets between industries at a pace not seen outside of crises; March brought the biggest gap between the best and worst-performing sectors since 2002.</p>\n<p>The link between moves in growth stocks and cheap “value” stocks is the weakest—measured by the correlation—since 1995; investors are using them as proxies for betting for or against economic recovery.</p>\n<p>Meanwhile, big and small stocks last moved so independently of each other during the dot-com bubble of 2000, never a reassuring sign.</p>\n<p>I think this is another aspect of TINA: There Is No Alternative to stocks. With Treasurys, corporate bonds and cashoffering meager or zero return, stocks offer the best hope of gains. Investors who would previously have shifted money from stocks to bonds or vice versa now just switch from one sort of stock to another—so falls in one are offset by gains in another.</p>\n<p>There is no guarantee that it continues this way, of course. Bring enough fear into play and investors will bolt for the exits no matter how low cash yields are, just as they did in March last year. But while times seem pretty good, it is hard to justify buying a long-dated bond yielding far less than inflation. And times do seem pretty good.</p>\n<p>A widespread theory among those of a cautious disposition is that stocks just keep going up because a massive bubble has been inflated by cheap money and government stimulus. Stocks haven’t been so expensive since 2000, while a bubble mentality is obvious in the wild overtrading of fashionable stocks. A cluster of small stocks popular with retail tradershas often featured at the topof the most-traded lists this year, notablyGameStopandAMC Entertainmentbut also favorites such as Virgin Galactic andBlackBerry.</p>\n<p>It is undeniable that stocks are far more expensive than usual. But bubbles usually involve lots of volatility as they inflate, not a calm exterior and turmoil within, because every little price drop is magnified by others fearful that the bubble is about to pop. In 1999 there were at least nine drops of more than 5% in the S&amp;P 500, and from its intraday peak in July to the October low it fell 13%.</p>\n<p>This time the most obvious threat to stocks is the Federal Reserve, rather than the market’s overvaluation. If the Fed raises rates, cash and bonds suddenly look much more attractive, and the TINA justification for buying extraordinarily expensive stocks is undermined.</p>\n<p>“You’ve got lots of volatility within the market but not a lot of volatility of the market,” says Robert Buckland, chief global equity strategist at Citigroup. “If there’s an alternative to just owning the index that could change.”</p>\n<p>This month’s Fed scare showed just how sensitive stock prices are when it turns out there is an alternative to stocks, of sorts. The Fedraised rates fractionally off the floorby offering 0.05% instead of 0% on its cash-absorbing reverse repurchase agreements, a kind of overnight secured deposit, and instantly sucked in $235 billion extra. Talk of rate increases coming in two years instead of the three previously projected added to pressure on stocks, and the S&amp;P fell just over 2% in three days before resuming its upward climb.</p>\n<p>If that was the reaction to the Fed just barely doing something close to nothing, imagine how scared the market would be if the Fed started a normal rate hiking cycle and made cash attractive again. It isn’t something I think is likely soon, but the number one threat that could bring the turmoil from the depths to the surface of this market is the Fed.</p>","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>The Stock Market Hasn’t Been This Placid in Years</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 11px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;line-height: 11px;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nThe Stock Market Hasn’t Been This Placid in Years\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-06-28 11:08 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-stock-market-hasnt-been-this-placid-in-years-11624740199?mod=itp_wsj><strong>WSJ</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>The U.S. stock marketis as calm as can beon the surface, while churning underneath more than it has in decades.\nThe S&P 500 is so quiet it is almost disconcerting. The index hasn’t had a 5% correction...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-stock-market-hasnt-been-this-placid-in-years-11624740199?mod=itp_wsj\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{".DJI":"道琼斯"},"source_url":"https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-stock-market-hasnt-been-this-placid-in-years-11624740199?mod=itp_wsj","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1177492181","content_text":"The U.S. stock marketis as calm as can beon the surface, while churning underneath more than it has in decades.\nThe S&P 500 is so quiet it is almost disconcerting. The index hasn’t had a 5% correction based on closing prices since the end of October; no wonder the new day traders who started buying shares in lockdown think the market only goes up. The last time the S&P was this serene for so long was in 2017, a period of calm that ended with the volatility crash early in 2018—although back then it was even quieter for much longer.\nYet, look at the performance of types of stocks, and they have been swinging around much more than they usually do. Investors have been switching their bets between industries at a pace not seen outside of crises; March brought the biggest gap between the best and worst-performing sectors since 2002.\nThe link between moves in growth stocks and cheap “value” stocks is the weakest—measured by the correlation—since 1995; investors are using them as proxies for betting for or against economic recovery.\nMeanwhile, big and small stocks last moved so independently of each other during the dot-com bubble of 2000, never a reassuring sign.\nI think this is another aspect of TINA: There Is No Alternative to stocks. With Treasurys, corporate bonds and cashoffering meager or zero return, stocks offer the best hope of gains. Investors who would previously have shifted money from stocks to bonds or vice versa now just switch from one sort of stock to another—so falls in one are offset by gains in another.\nThere is no guarantee that it continues this way, of course. Bring enough fear into play and investors will bolt for the exits no matter how low cash yields are, just as they did in March last year. But while times seem pretty good, it is hard to justify buying a long-dated bond yielding far less than inflation. And times do seem pretty good.\nA widespread theory among those of a cautious disposition is that stocks just keep going up because a massive bubble has been inflated by cheap money and government stimulus. Stocks haven’t been so expensive since 2000, while a bubble mentality is obvious in the wild overtrading of fashionable stocks. A cluster of small stocks popular with retail tradershas often featured at the topof the most-traded lists this year, notablyGameStopandAMC Entertainmentbut also favorites such as Virgin Galactic andBlackBerry.\nIt is undeniable that stocks are far more expensive than usual. But bubbles usually involve lots of volatility as they inflate, not a calm exterior and turmoil within, because every little price drop is magnified by others fearful that the bubble is about to pop. In 1999 there were at least nine drops of more than 5% in the S&P 500, and from its intraday peak in July to the October low it fell 13%.\nThis time the most obvious threat to stocks is the Federal Reserve, rather than the market’s overvaluation. If the Fed raises rates, cash and bonds suddenly look much more attractive, and the TINA justification for buying extraordinarily expensive stocks is undermined.\n“You’ve got lots of volatility within the market but not a lot of volatility of the market,” says Robert Buckland, chief global equity strategist at Citigroup. “If there’s an alternative to just owning the index that could change.”\nThis month’s Fed scare showed just how sensitive stock prices are when it turns out there is an alternative to stocks, of sorts. The Fedraised rates fractionally off the floorby offering 0.05% instead of 0% on its cash-absorbing reverse repurchase agreements, a kind of overnight secured deposit, and instantly sucked in $235 billion extra. Talk of rate increases coming in two years instead of the three previously projected added to pressure on stocks, and the S&P fell just over 2% in three days before resuming its upward climb.\nIf that was the reaction to the Fed just barely doing something close to nothing, imagine how scared the market would be if the Fed started a normal rate hiking cycle and made cash attractive again. It isn’t something I think is likely soon, but the number one threat that could bring the turmoil from the depths to the surface of this market is the Fed.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"likeStatus":false,"favoriteStatus":false,"reportStatus":false,"tweetType":1,"comments":[{"id":5048741,"gmtCreate":1624857081918,"gmtModify":1663230178232,"authorId":3579150819625638,"author":{"id":3579150819625638,"idStr":"3579150819625638","authorId":3579150819625638,"name":"gorgonzola","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/1c98c4db336df9bf3de0d2833d8ff0cf","vip":1,"crmLevel":5,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"individualDisplayBadges":[]},"repliedAuthorId":0,"objectId":127560317,"type":1,"supId":0,"prevId":0,"content":"done. please like and comment back.&nbsp; Thanks!","text":"done. please like and comment back.&nbsp; Thanks!","html":"done. please like and comment back.&nbsp; Thanks!"}],"langContent":"EN"},{"id":127582278,"gmtCreate":1624856798494,"gmtModify":1703846339800,"author":{"id":"3581681532128922","authorId":"3581681532128922","name":"tiototo","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/23c32a08fbf6fc88a1bda4f6b4f99ddb","vip":1,"crmLevel":4,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"idStr":"3581681532128922","authorIdStr":"3581681532128922"},"htmlText":"Agree..","listText":"Agree..","text":"Agree..","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":4,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/127582278","repostId":1177492181,"repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1177492181","kind":"news","pubTimestamp":1624849703,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/1177492181?lang=&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2021-06-28 11:08","market":"us","language":"en","title":"The Stock Market Hasn’t Been This Placid in Years","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1177492181","media":"WSJ","summary":"The U.S. stock marketis as calm as can beon the surface, while churning underneath more than it has ","content":"<p>The U.S. stock marketis as calm as can beon the surface, while churning underneath more than it has in decades.</p>\n<p>The S&amp;P 500 is so quiet it is almost disconcerting. The index hasn’t had a 5% correction based on closing prices since the end of October; no wonder the new day traders who started buying shares in lockdown think the market only goes up. The last time the S&amp;P was this serene for so long was in 2017, a period of calm that ended with the volatility crash early in 2018—although back then it was even quieter for much longer.</p>\n<p>Yet, look at the performance of types of stocks, and they have been swinging around much more than they usually do. Investors have been switching their bets between industries at a pace not seen outside of crises; March brought the biggest gap between the best and worst-performing sectors since 2002.</p>\n<p>The link between moves in growth stocks and cheap “value” stocks is the weakest—measured by the correlation—since 1995; investors are using them as proxies for betting for or against economic recovery.</p>\n<p>Meanwhile, big and small stocks last moved so independently of each other during the dot-com bubble of 2000, never a reassuring sign.</p>\n<p>I think this is another aspect of TINA: There Is No Alternative to stocks. With Treasurys, corporate bonds and cashoffering meager or zero return, stocks offer the best hope of gains. Investors who would previously have shifted money from stocks to bonds or vice versa now just switch from one sort of stock to another—so falls in one are offset by gains in another.</p>\n<p>There is no guarantee that it continues this way, of course. Bring enough fear into play and investors will bolt for the exits no matter how low cash yields are, just as they did in March last year. But while times seem pretty good, it is hard to justify buying a long-dated bond yielding far less than inflation. And times do seem pretty good.</p>\n<p>A widespread theory among those of a cautious disposition is that stocks just keep going up because a massive bubble has been inflated by cheap money and government stimulus. Stocks haven’t been so expensive since 2000, while a bubble mentality is obvious in the wild overtrading of fashionable stocks. A cluster of small stocks popular with retail tradershas often featured at the topof the most-traded lists this year, notablyGameStopandAMC Entertainmentbut also favorites such as Virgin Galactic andBlackBerry.</p>\n<p>It is undeniable that stocks are far more expensive than usual. But bubbles usually involve lots of volatility as they inflate, not a calm exterior and turmoil within, because every little price drop is magnified by others fearful that the bubble is about to pop. In 1999 there were at least nine drops of more than 5% in the S&amp;P 500, and from its intraday peak in July to the October low it fell 13%.</p>\n<p>This time the most obvious threat to stocks is the Federal Reserve, rather than the market’s overvaluation. If the Fed raises rates, cash and bonds suddenly look much more attractive, and the TINA justification for buying extraordinarily expensive stocks is undermined.</p>\n<p>“You’ve got lots of volatility within the market but not a lot of volatility of the market,” says Robert Buckland, chief global equity strategist at Citigroup. “If there’s an alternative to just owning the index that could change.”</p>\n<p>This month’s Fed scare showed just how sensitive stock prices are when it turns out there is an alternative to stocks, of sorts. The Fedraised rates fractionally off the floorby offering 0.05% instead of 0% on its cash-absorbing reverse repurchase agreements, a kind of overnight secured deposit, and instantly sucked in $235 billion extra. Talk of rate increases coming in two years instead of the three previously projected added to pressure on stocks, and the S&amp;P fell just over 2% in three days before resuming its upward climb.</p>\n<p>If that was the reaction to the Fed just barely doing something close to nothing, imagine how scared the market would be if the Fed started a normal rate hiking cycle and made cash attractive again. It isn’t something I think is likely soon, but the number one threat that could bring the turmoil from the depths to the surface of this market is the Fed.</p>","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>The Stock Market Hasn’t Been This Placid in Years</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 11px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;line-height: 11px;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nThe Stock Market Hasn’t Been This Placid in Years\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-06-28 11:08 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-stock-market-hasnt-been-this-placid-in-years-11624740199?mod=itp_wsj><strong>WSJ</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>The U.S. stock marketis as calm as can beon the surface, while churning underneath more than it has in decades.\nThe S&P 500 is so quiet it is almost disconcerting. The index hasn’t had a 5% correction...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-stock-market-hasnt-been-this-placid-in-years-11624740199?mod=itp_wsj\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{".DJI":"道琼斯"},"source_url":"https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-stock-market-hasnt-been-this-placid-in-years-11624740199?mod=itp_wsj","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1177492181","content_text":"The U.S. stock marketis as calm as can beon the surface, while churning underneath more than it has in decades.\nThe S&P 500 is so quiet it is almost disconcerting. The index hasn’t had a 5% correction based on closing prices since the end of October; no wonder the new day traders who started buying shares in lockdown think the market only goes up. The last time the S&P was this serene for so long was in 2017, a period of calm that ended with the volatility crash early in 2018—although back then it was even quieter for much longer.\nYet, look at the performance of types of stocks, and they have been swinging around much more than they usually do. Investors have been switching their bets between industries at a pace not seen outside of crises; March brought the biggest gap between the best and worst-performing sectors since 2002.\nThe link between moves in growth stocks and cheap “value” stocks is the weakest—measured by the correlation—since 1995; investors are using them as proxies for betting for or against economic recovery.\nMeanwhile, big and small stocks last moved so independently of each other during the dot-com bubble of 2000, never a reassuring sign.\nI think this is another aspect of TINA: There Is No Alternative to stocks. With Treasurys, corporate bonds and cashoffering meager or zero return, stocks offer the best hope of gains. Investors who would previously have shifted money from stocks to bonds or vice versa now just switch from one sort of stock to another—so falls in one are offset by gains in another.\nThere is no guarantee that it continues this way, of course. Bring enough fear into play and investors will bolt for the exits no matter how low cash yields are, just as they did in March last year. But while times seem pretty good, it is hard to justify buying a long-dated bond yielding far less than inflation. And times do seem pretty good.\nA widespread theory among those of a cautious disposition is that stocks just keep going up because a massive bubble has been inflated by cheap money and government stimulus. Stocks haven’t been so expensive since 2000, while a bubble mentality is obvious in the wild overtrading of fashionable stocks. A cluster of small stocks popular with retail tradershas often featured at the topof the most-traded lists this year, notablyGameStopandAMC Entertainmentbut also favorites such as Virgin Galactic andBlackBerry.\nIt is undeniable that stocks are far more expensive than usual. But bubbles usually involve lots of volatility as they inflate, not a calm exterior and turmoil within, because every little price drop is magnified by others fearful that the bubble is about to pop. In 1999 there were at least nine drops of more than 5% in the S&P 500, and from its intraday peak in July to the October low it fell 13%.\nThis time the most obvious threat to stocks is the Federal Reserve, rather than the market’s overvaluation. If the Fed raises rates, cash and bonds suddenly look much more attractive, and the TINA justification for buying extraordinarily expensive stocks is undermined.\n“You’ve got lots of volatility within the market but not a lot of volatility of the market,” says Robert Buckland, chief global equity strategist at Citigroup. “If there’s an alternative to just owning the index that could change.”\nThis month’s Fed scare showed just how sensitive stock prices are when it turns out there is an alternative to stocks, of sorts. The Fedraised rates fractionally off the floorby offering 0.05% instead of 0% on its cash-absorbing reverse repurchase agreements, a kind of overnight secured deposit, and instantly sucked in $235 billion extra. Talk of rate increases coming in two years instead of the three previously projected added to pressure on stocks, and the S&P fell just over 2% in three days before resuming its upward climb.\nIf that was the reaction to the Fed just barely doing something close to nothing, imagine how scared the market would be if the Fed started a normal rate hiking cycle and made cash attractive again. It isn’t something I think is likely soon, but the number one threat that could bring the turmoil from the depths to the surface of this market is the Fed.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"likeStatus":false,"favoriteStatus":false,"reportStatus":false,"tweetType":1,"langContent":"EN"},{"id":127505921,"gmtCreate":1624854421063,"gmtModify":1703846283581,"author":{"id":"3566205103165331","authorId":"3566205103165331","name":"MaeTan","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/9b4c7db40f5ec74ea810182d08212cf4","vip":1,"crmLevel":2,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"idStr":"3566205103165331","authorIdStr":"3566205103165331"},"htmlText":"Is this the calm before the storm? When will the storm start? How bad will the storm be? So many questions in my mind....","listText":"Is this the calm before the storm? When will the storm start? How bad will the storm be? So many questions in my mind....","text":"Is this the calm before the storm? When will the storm start? How bad will the storm be? So many questions in my mind....","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":9,"commentSize":4,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/127505921","repostId":1177492181,"repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1177492181","kind":"news","pubTimestamp":1624849703,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/1177492181?lang=&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2021-06-28 11:08","market":"us","language":"en","title":"The Stock Market Hasn’t Been This Placid in Years","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1177492181","media":"WSJ","summary":"The U.S. stock marketis as calm as can beon the surface, while churning underneath more than it has ","content":"<p>The U.S. stock marketis as calm as can beon the surface, while churning underneath more than it has in decades.</p>\n<p>The S&amp;P 500 is so quiet it is almost disconcerting. The index hasn’t had a 5% correction based on closing prices since the end of October; no wonder the new day traders who started buying shares in lockdown think the market only goes up. The last time the S&amp;P was this serene for so long was in 2017, a period of calm that ended with the volatility crash early in 2018—although back then it was even quieter for much longer.</p>\n<p>Yet, look at the performance of types of stocks, and they have been swinging around much more than they usually do. Investors have been switching their bets between industries at a pace not seen outside of crises; March brought the biggest gap between the best and worst-performing sectors since 2002.</p>\n<p>The link between moves in growth stocks and cheap “value” stocks is the weakest—measured by the correlation—since 1995; investors are using them as proxies for betting for or against economic recovery.</p>\n<p>Meanwhile, big and small stocks last moved so independently of each other during the dot-com bubble of 2000, never a reassuring sign.</p>\n<p>I think this is another aspect of TINA: There Is No Alternative to stocks. With Treasurys, corporate bonds and cashoffering meager or zero return, stocks offer the best hope of gains. Investors who would previously have shifted money from stocks to bonds or vice versa now just switch from one sort of stock to another—so falls in one are offset by gains in another.</p>\n<p>There is no guarantee that it continues this way, of course. Bring enough fear into play and investors will bolt for the exits no matter how low cash yields are, just as they did in March last year. But while times seem pretty good, it is hard to justify buying a long-dated bond yielding far less than inflation. And times do seem pretty good.</p>\n<p>A widespread theory among those of a cautious disposition is that stocks just keep going up because a massive bubble has been inflated by cheap money and government stimulus. Stocks haven’t been so expensive since 2000, while a bubble mentality is obvious in the wild overtrading of fashionable stocks. A cluster of small stocks popular with retail tradershas often featured at the topof the most-traded lists this year, notablyGameStopandAMC Entertainmentbut also favorites such as Virgin Galactic andBlackBerry.</p>\n<p>It is undeniable that stocks are far more expensive than usual. But bubbles usually involve lots of volatility as they inflate, not a calm exterior and turmoil within, because every little price drop is magnified by others fearful that the bubble is about to pop. In 1999 there were at least nine drops of more than 5% in the S&amp;P 500, and from its intraday peak in July to the October low it fell 13%.</p>\n<p>This time the most obvious threat to stocks is the Federal Reserve, rather than the market’s overvaluation. If the Fed raises rates, cash and bonds suddenly look much more attractive, and the TINA justification for buying extraordinarily expensive stocks is undermined.</p>\n<p>“You’ve got lots of volatility within the market but not a lot of volatility of the market,” says Robert Buckland, chief global equity strategist at Citigroup. “If there’s an alternative to just owning the index that could change.”</p>\n<p>This month’s Fed scare showed just how sensitive stock prices are when it turns out there is an alternative to stocks, of sorts. The Fedraised rates fractionally off the floorby offering 0.05% instead of 0% on its cash-absorbing reverse repurchase agreements, a kind of overnight secured deposit, and instantly sucked in $235 billion extra. Talk of rate increases coming in two years instead of the three previously projected added to pressure on stocks, and the S&amp;P fell just over 2% in three days before resuming its upward climb.</p>\n<p>If that was the reaction to the Fed just barely doing something close to nothing, imagine how scared the market would be if the Fed started a normal rate hiking cycle and made cash attractive again. It isn’t something I think is likely soon, but the number one threat that could bring the turmoil from the depths to the surface of this market is the Fed.</p>","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>The Stock Market Hasn’t Been This Placid in Years</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 11px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;line-height: 11px;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nThe Stock Market Hasn’t Been This Placid in Years\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-06-28 11:08 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-stock-market-hasnt-been-this-placid-in-years-11624740199?mod=itp_wsj><strong>WSJ</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>The U.S. stock marketis as calm as can beon the surface, while churning underneath more than it has in decades.\nThe S&P 500 is so quiet it is almost disconcerting. The index hasn’t had a 5% correction...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-stock-market-hasnt-been-this-placid-in-years-11624740199?mod=itp_wsj\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{".DJI":"道琼斯"},"source_url":"https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-stock-market-hasnt-been-this-placid-in-years-11624740199?mod=itp_wsj","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1177492181","content_text":"The U.S. stock marketis as calm as can beon the surface, while churning underneath more than it has in decades.\nThe S&P 500 is so quiet it is almost disconcerting. The index hasn’t had a 5% correction based on closing prices since the end of October; no wonder the new day traders who started buying shares in lockdown think the market only goes up. The last time the S&P was this serene for so long was in 2017, a period of calm that ended with the volatility crash early in 2018—although back then it was even quieter for much longer.\nYet, look at the performance of types of stocks, and they have been swinging around much more than they usually do. Investors have been switching their bets between industries at a pace not seen outside of crises; March brought the biggest gap between the best and worst-performing sectors since 2002.\nThe link between moves in growth stocks and cheap “value” stocks is the weakest—measured by the correlation—since 1995; investors are using them as proxies for betting for or against economic recovery.\nMeanwhile, big and small stocks last moved so independently of each other during the dot-com bubble of 2000, never a reassuring sign.\nI think this is another aspect of TINA: There Is No Alternative to stocks. With Treasurys, corporate bonds and cashoffering meager or zero return, stocks offer the best hope of gains. Investors who would previously have shifted money from stocks to bonds or vice versa now just switch from one sort of stock to another—so falls in one are offset by gains in another.\nThere is no guarantee that it continues this way, of course. Bring enough fear into play and investors will bolt for the exits no matter how low cash yields are, just as they did in March last year. But while times seem pretty good, it is hard to justify buying a long-dated bond yielding far less than inflation. And times do seem pretty good.\nA widespread theory among those of a cautious disposition is that stocks just keep going up because a massive bubble has been inflated by cheap money and government stimulus. Stocks haven’t been so expensive since 2000, while a bubble mentality is obvious in the wild overtrading of fashionable stocks. A cluster of small stocks popular with retail tradershas often featured at the topof the most-traded lists this year, notablyGameStopandAMC Entertainmentbut also favorites such as Virgin Galactic andBlackBerry.\nIt is undeniable that stocks are far more expensive than usual. But bubbles usually involve lots of volatility as they inflate, not a calm exterior and turmoil within, because every little price drop is magnified by others fearful that the bubble is about to pop. In 1999 there were at least nine drops of more than 5% in the S&P 500, and from its intraday peak in July to the October low it fell 13%.\nThis time the most obvious threat to stocks is the Federal Reserve, rather than the market’s overvaluation. If the Fed raises rates, cash and bonds suddenly look much more attractive, and the TINA justification for buying extraordinarily expensive stocks is undermined.\n“You’ve got lots of volatility within the market but not a lot of volatility of the market,” says Robert Buckland, chief global equity strategist at Citigroup. “If there’s an alternative to just owning the index that could change.”\nThis month’s Fed scare showed just how sensitive stock prices are when it turns out there is an alternative to stocks, of sorts. The Fedraised rates fractionally off the floorby offering 0.05% instead of 0% on its cash-absorbing reverse repurchase agreements, a kind of overnight secured deposit, and instantly sucked in $235 billion extra. Talk of rate increases coming in two years instead of the three previously projected added to pressure on stocks, and the S&P fell just over 2% in three days before resuming its upward climb.\nIf that was the reaction to the Fed just barely doing something close to nothing, imagine how scared the market would be if the Fed started a normal rate hiking cycle and made cash attractive again. It isn’t something I think is likely soon, but the number one threat that could bring the turmoil from the depths to the surface of this market is the Fed.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"likeStatus":false,"favoriteStatus":false,"reportStatus":false,"tweetType":1,"comments":[{"id":5090783,"gmtCreate":1625132543119,"gmtModify":1663230380127,"authorId":3576843963312863,"author":{"id":3576843963312863,"idStr":"3576843963312863","authorId":3576843963312863,"name":"MaddyLIM","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","vip":1,"crmLevel":2,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"individualDisplayBadges":[]},"repliedAuthorId":0,"objectId":127505921,"type":1,"supId":0,"prevId":0,"content":"Buy the dips! ","text":"Buy the dips! ","html":"Buy the dips! "},{"id":5049649,"gmtCreate":1624862537533,"gmtModify":1663230182743,"authorId":3581331938298103,"author":{"id":3581331938298103,"idStr":"3581331938298103","authorId":3581331938298103,"name":"SandDust","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/ea6083d742fc232449a625fb122842c8","vip":1,"currentWearingBadge":{"badgeId":"1026c425416b44e0aac28c11a0848493-2","templateUuid":"1026c425416b44e0aac28c11a0848493","name":"Senior Tiger","description":"Join the tiger community for 1000 days","bigImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/0063fb68ea29c9ae6858c58630e182d5","smallImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/96c699a93be4214d4b49aea6a5a5d1a4","grayImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/35b0e542a9ff77046ed69ef602bc105d","redirectLinkEnabled":0,"hasAllocated":1,"isWearing":1,"stampPosition":0,"hasStamp":0,"allocationCount":1,"allocatedDate":"2024.01.09","individualDisplayEnabled":0,"individualDisplaySort":0,"categoryType":1001},"crmLevel":6,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"individualDisplayBadges":[]},"repliedAuthorId":0,"objectId":127505921,"type":1,"supId":0,"prevId":0,"content":"Stay invested. Keep some money aside for the <u>dip</u>","text":"Stay invested. Keep some money aside for the <u>dip</u>","html":"Stay invested. Keep some money aside for the <u>dip</u>"},{"id":5048532,"gmtCreate":1624856014886,"gmtModify":1663230177944,"authorId":3582705285814354,"author":{"id":3582705285814354,"idStr":"3582705285814354","authorId":3582705285814354,"name":"Ella12345","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/6fb85787771e7c52590530c8fdf627c6","vip":1,"crmLevel":1,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"individualDisplayBadges":[]},"repliedAuthorId":0,"objectId":127505921,"type":1,"supId":0,"prevId":0,"content":"Ok","text":"Ok","html":"Ok"},{"id":5048325,"gmtCreate":1624854951133,"gmtModify":1635243458903,"authorId":3581982942860939,"author":{"id":3581982942860939,"idStr":"3581982942860939","authorId":3581982942860939,"name":"SimS","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","vip":1,"crmLevel":1,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"individualDisplayBadges":[]},"repliedAuthorId":0,"objectId":127505921,"type":1,"supId":0,"prevId":0,"content":"stay the course &amp; buy the dips","text":"stay the course &amp; buy the dips","html":"stay the course &amp; buy the dips"}],"langContent":"EN"},{"id":127242744,"gmtCreate":1624853527888,"gmtModify":1703846255284,"author":{"id":"3587027027930192","authorId":"3587027027930192","name":"TweetyCSL","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/85f2d3e8dadad4616d63edfcb84ccf50","vip":1,"crmLevel":2,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"idStr":"3587027027930192","authorIdStr":"3587027027930192"},"htmlText":"Like","listText":"Like","text":"Like","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":4,"commentSize":1,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/127242744","repostId":1177492181,"repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1177492181","kind":"news","pubTimestamp":1624849703,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/1177492181?lang=&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2021-06-28 11:08","market":"us","language":"en","title":"The Stock Market Hasn’t Been This Placid in Years","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1177492181","media":"WSJ","summary":"The U.S. stock marketis as calm as can beon the surface, while churning underneath more than it has ","content":"<p>The U.S. stock marketis as calm as can beon the surface, while churning underneath more than it has in decades.</p>\n<p>The S&amp;P 500 is so quiet it is almost disconcerting. The index hasn’t had a 5% correction based on closing prices since the end of October; no wonder the new day traders who started buying shares in lockdown think the market only goes up. The last time the S&amp;P was this serene for so long was in 2017, a period of calm that ended with the volatility crash early in 2018—although back then it was even quieter for much longer.</p>\n<p>Yet, look at the performance of types of stocks, and they have been swinging around much more than they usually do. Investors have been switching their bets between industries at a pace not seen outside of crises; March brought the biggest gap between the best and worst-performing sectors since 2002.</p>\n<p>The link between moves in growth stocks and cheap “value” stocks is the weakest—measured by the correlation—since 1995; investors are using them as proxies for betting for or against economic recovery.</p>\n<p>Meanwhile, big and small stocks last moved so independently of each other during the dot-com bubble of 2000, never a reassuring sign.</p>\n<p>I think this is another aspect of TINA: There Is No Alternative to stocks. With Treasurys, corporate bonds and cashoffering meager or zero return, stocks offer the best hope of gains. Investors who would previously have shifted money from stocks to bonds or vice versa now just switch from one sort of stock to another—so falls in one are offset by gains in another.</p>\n<p>There is no guarantee that it continues this way, of course. Bring enough fear into play and investors will bolt for the exits no matter how low cash yields are, just as they did in March last year. But while times seem pretty good, it is hard to justify buying a long-dated bond yielding far less than inflation. And times do seem pretty good.</p>\n<p>A widespread theory among those of a cautious disposition is that stocks just keep going up because a massive bubble has been inflated by cheap money and government stimulus. Stocks haven’t been so expensive since 2000, while a bubble mentality is obvious in the wild overtrading of fashionable stocks. A cluster of small stocks popular with retail tradershas often featured at the topof the most-traded lists this year, notablyGameStopandAMC Entertainmentbut also favorites such as Virgin Galactic andBlackBerry.</p>\n<p>It is undeniable that stocks are far more expensive than usual. But bubbles usually involve lots of volatility as they inflate, not a calm exterior and turmoil within, because every little price drop is magnified by others fearful that the bubble is about to pop. In 1999 there were at least nine drops of more than 5% in the S&amp;P 500, and from its intraday peak in July to the October low it fell 13%.</p>\n<p>This time the most obvious threat to stocks is the Federal Reserve, rather than the market’s overvaluation. If the Fed raises rates, cash and bonds suddenly look much more attractive, and the TINA justification for buying extraordinarily expensive stocks is undermined.</p>\n<p>“You’ve got lots of volatility within the market but not a lot of volatility of the market,” says Robert Buckland, chief global equity strategist at Citigroup. “If there’s an alternative to just owning the index that could change.”</p>\n<p>This month’s Fed scare showed just how sensitive stock prices are when it turns out there is an alternative to stocks, of sorts. The Fedraised rates fractionally off the floorby offering 0.05% instead of 0% on its cash-absorbing reverse repurchase agreements, a kind of overnight secured deposit, and instantly sucked in $235 billion extra. Talk of rate increases coming in two years instead of the three previously projected added to pressure on stocks, and the S&amp;P fell just over 2% in three days before resuming its upward climb.</p>\n<p>If that was the reaction to the Fed just barely doing something close to nothing, imagine how scared the market would be if the Fed started a normal rate hiking cycle and made cash attractive again. It isn’t something I think is likely soon, but the number one threat that could bring the turmoil from the depths to the surface of this market is the Fed.</p>","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>The Stock Market Hasn’t Been This Placid in Years</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 11px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;line-height: 11px;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nThe Stock Market Hasn’t Been This Placid in Years\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-06-28 11:08 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-stock-market-hasnt-been-this-placid-in-years-11624740199?mod=itp_wsj><strong>WSJ</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>The U.S. stock marketis as calm as can beon the surface, while churning underneath more than it has in decades.\nThe S&P 500 is so quiet it is almost disconcerting. The index hasn’t had a 5% correction...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-stock-market-hasnt-been-this-placid-in-years-11624740199?mod=itp_wsj\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{".DJI":"道琼斯"},"source_url":"https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-stock-market-hasnt-been-this-placid-in-years-11624740199?mod=itp_wsj","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1177492181","content_text":"The U.S. stock marketis as calm as can beon the surface, while churning underneath more than it has in decades.\nThe S&P 500 is so quiet it is almost disconcerting. The index hasn’t had a 5% correction based on closing prices since the end of October; no wonder the new day traders who started buying shares in lockdown think the market only goes up. The last time the S&P was this serene for so long was in 2017, a period of calm that ended with the volatility crash early in 2018—although back then it was even quieter for much longer.\nYet, look at the performance of types of stocks, and they have been swinging around much more than they usually do. Investors have been switching their bets between industries at a pace not seen outside of crises; March brought the biggest gap between the best and worst-performing sectors since 2002.\nThe link between moves in growth stocks and cheap “value” stocks is the weakest—measured by the correlation—since 1995; investors are using them as proxies for betting for or against economic recovery.\nMeanwhile, big and small stocks last moved so independently of each other during the dot-com bubble of 2000, never a reassuring sign.\nI think this is another aspect of TINA: There Is No Alternative to stocks. With Treasurys, corporate bonds and cashoffering meager or zero return, stocks offer the best hope of gains. Investors who would previously have shifted money from stocks to bonds or vice versa now just switch from one sort of stock to another—so falls in one are offset by gains in another.\nThere is no guarantee that it continues this way, of course. Bring enough fear into play and investors will bolt for the exits no matter how low cash yields are, just as they did in March last year. But while times seem pretty good, it is hard to justify buying a long-dated bond yielding far less than inflation. And times do seem pretty good.\nA widespread theory among those of a cautious disposition is that stocks just keep going up because a massive bubble has been inflated by cheap money and government stimulus. Stocks haven’t been so expensive since 2000, while a bubble mentality is obvious in the wild overtrading of fashionable stocks. A cluster of small stocks popular with retail tradershas often featured at the topof the most-traded lists this year, notablyGameStopandAMC Entertainmentbut also favorites such as Virgin Galactic andBlackBerry.\nIt is undeniable that stocks are far more expensive than usual. But bubbles usually involve lots of volatility as they inflate, not a calm exterior and turmoil within, because every little price drop is magnified by others fearful that the bubble is about to pop. In 1999 there were at least nine drops of more than 5% in the S&P 500, and from its intraday peak in July to the October low it fell 13%.\nThis time the most obvious threat to stocks is the Federal Reserve, rather than the market’s overvaluation. If the Fed raises rates, cash and bonds suddenly look much more attractive, and the TINA justification for buying extraordinarily expensive stocks is undermined.\n“You’ve got lots of volatility within the market but not a lot of volatility of the market,” says Robert Buckland, chief global equity strategist at Citigroup. “If there’s an alternative to just owning the index that could change.”\nThis month’s Fed scare showed just how sensitive stock prices are when it turns out there is an alternative to stocks, of sorts. The Fedraised rates fractionally off the floorby offering 0.05% instead of 0% on its cash-absorbing reverse repurchase agreements, a kind of overnight secured deposit, and instantly sucked in $235 billion extra. Talk of rate increases coming in two years instead of the three previously projected added to pressure on stocks, and the S&P fell just over 2% in three days before resuming its upward climb.\nIf that was the reaction to the Fed just barely doing something close to nothing, imagine how scared the market would be if the Fed started a normal rate hiking cycle and made cash attractive again. It isn’t something I think is likely soon, but the number one threat that could bring the turmoil from the depths to the surface of this market is the Fed.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"likeStatus":false,"favoriteStatus":false,"reportStatus":false,"tweetType":1,"comments":[{"id":5048536,"gmtCreate":1624856027001,"gmtModify":1663230178228,"authorId":3582705285814354,"author":{"id":3582705285814354,"idStr":"3582705285814354","authorId":3582705285814354,"name":"Ella12345","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/6fb85787771e7c52590530c8fdf627c6","vip":1,"crmLevel":1,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"individualDisplayBadges":[]},"repliedAuthorId":0,"objectId":127242744,"type":1,"supId":0,"prevId":0,"content":"Okdjsjwjw","text":"Okdjsjwjw","html":"Okdjsjwjw"}],"langContent":"EN"},{"id":127257994,"gmtCreate":1624852935918,"gmtModify":1703846243795,"author":{"id":"3575694115795487","authorId":"3575694115795487","name":"Aun9","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","vip":1,"crmLevel":4,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"idStr":"3575694115795487","authorIdStr":"3575694115795487"},"htmlText":"Scary&nbsp;","listText":"Scary&nbsp;","text":"Scary","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":11,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/127257994","repostId":1177492181,"repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1177492181","kind":"news","pubTimestamp":1624849703,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/1177492181?lang=&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2021-06-28 11:08","market":"us","language":"en","title":"The Stock Market Hasn’t Been This Placid in Years","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1177492181","media":"WSJ","summary":"The U.S. stock marketis as calm as can beon the surface, while churning underneath more than it has ","content":"<p>The U.S. stock marketis as calm as can beon the surface, while churning underneath more than it has in decades.</p>\n<p>The S&amp;P 500 is so quiet it is almost disconcerting. The index hasn’t had a 5% correction based on closing prices since the end of October; no wonder the new day traders who started buying shares in lockdown think the market only goes up. The last time the S&amp;P was this serene for so long was in 2017, a period of calm that ended with the volatility crash early in 2018—although back then it was even quieter for much longer.</p>\n<p>Yet, look at the performance of types of stocks, and they have been swinging around much more than they usually do. Investors have been switching their bets between industries at a pace not seen outside of crises; March brought the biggest gap between the best and worst-performing sectors since 2002.</p>\n<p>The link between moves in growth stocks and cheap “value” stocks is the weakest—measured by the correlation—since 1995; investors are using them as proxies for betting for or against economic recovery.</p>\n<p>Meanwhile, big and small stocks last moved so independently of each other during the dot-com bubble of 2000, never a reassuring sign.</p>\n<p>I think this is another aspect of TINA: There Is No Alternative to stocks. With Treasurys, corporate bonds and cashoffering meager or zero return, stocks offer the best hope of gains. Investors who would previously have shifted money from stocks to bonds or vice versa now just switch from one sort of stock to another—so falls in one are offset by gains in another.</p>\n<p>There is no guarantee that it continues this way, of course. Bring enough fear into play and investors will bolt for the exits no matter how low cash yields are, just as they did in March last year. But while times seem pretty good, it is hard to justify buying a long-dated bond yielding far less than inflation. And times do seem pretty good.</p>\n<p>A widespread theory among those of a cautious disposition is that stocks just keep going up because a massive bubble has been inflated by cheap money and government stimulus. Stocks haven’t been so expensive since 2000, while a bubble mentality is obvious in the wild overtrading of fashionable stocks. A cluster of small stocks popular with retail tradershas often featured at the topof the most-traded lists this year, notablyGameStopandAMC Entertainmentbut also favorites such as Virgin Galactic andBlackBerry.</p>\n<p>It is undeniable that stocks are far more expensive than usual. But bubbles usually involve lots of volatility as they inflate, not a calm exterior and turmoil within, because every little price drop is magnified by others fearful that the bubble is about to pop. In 1999 there were at least nine drops of more than 5% in the S&amp;P 500, and from its intraday peak in July to the October low it fell 13%.</p>\n<p>This time the most obvious threat to stocks is the Federal Reserve, rather than the market’s overvaluation. If the Fed raises rates, cash and bonds suddenly look much more attractive, and the TINA justification for buying extraordinarily expensive stocks is undermined.</p>\n<p>“You’ve got lots of volatility within the market but not a lot of volatility of the market,” says Robert Buckland, chief global equity strategist at Citigroup. “If there’s an alternative to just owning the index that could change.”</p>\n<p>This month’s Fed scare showed just how sensitive stock prices are when it turns out there is an alternative to stocks, of sorts. The Fedraised rates fractionally off the floorby offering 0.05% instead of 0% on its cash-absorbing reverse repurchase agreements, a kind of overnight secured deposit, and instantly sucked in $235 billion extra. Talk of rate increases coming in two years instead of the three previously projected added to pressure on stocks, and the S&amp;P fell just over 2% in three days before resuming its upward climb.</p>\n<p>If that was the reaction to the Fed just barely doing something close to nothing, imagine how scared the market would be if the Fed started a normal rate hiking cycle and made cash attractive again. It isn’t something I think is likely soon, but the number one threat that could bring the turmoil from the depths to the surface of this market is the Fed.</p>","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>The Stock Market Hasn’t Been This Placid in Years</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 11px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;line-height: 11px;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nThe Stock Market Hasn’t Been This Placid in Years\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-06-28 11:08 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-stock-market-hasnt-been-this-placid-in-years-11624740199?mod=itp_wsj><strong>WSJ</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>The U.S. stock marketis as calm as can beon the surface, while churning underneath more than it has in decades.\nThe S&P 500 is so quiet it is almost disconcerting. The index hasn’t had a 5% correction...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-stock-market-hasnt-been-this-placid-in-years-11624740199?mod=itp_wsj\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{".DJI":"道琼斯"},"source_url":"https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-stock-market-hasnt-been-this-placid-in-years-11624740199?mod=itp_wsj","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1177492181","content_text":"The U.S. stock marketis as calm as can beon the surface, while churning underneath more than it has in decades.\nThe S&P 500 is so quiet it is almost disconcerting. The index hasn’t had a 5% correction based on closing prices since the end of October; no wonder the new day traders who started buying shares in lockdown think the market only goes up. The last time the S&P was this serene for so long was in 2017, a period of calm that ended with the volatility crash early in 2018—although back then it was even quieter for much longer.\nYet, look at the performance of types of stocks, and they have been swinging around much more than they usually do. Investors have been switching their bets between industries at a pace not seen outside of crises; March brought the biggest gap between the best and worst-performing sectors since 2002.\nThe link between moves in growth stocks and cheap “value” stocks is the weakest—measured by the correlation—since 1995; investors are using them as proxies for betting for or against economic recovery.\nMeanwhile, big and small stocks last moved so independently of each other during the dot-com bubble of 2000, never a reassuring sign.\nI think this is another aspect of TINA: There Is No Alternative to stocks. With Treasurys, corporate bonds and cashoffering meager or zero return, stocks offer the best hope of gains. Investors who would previously have shifted money from stocks to bonds or vice versa now just switch from one sort of stock to another—so falls in one are offset by gains in another.\nThere is no guarantee that it continues this way, of course. Bring enough fear into play and investors will bolt for the exits no matter how low cash yields are, just as they did in March last year. But while times seem pretty good, it is hard to justify buying a long-dated bond yielding far less than inflation. And times do seem pretty good.\nA widespread theory among those of a cautious disposition is that stocks just keep going up because a massive bubble has been inflated by cheap money and government stimulus. Stocks haven’t been so expensive since 2000, while a bubble mentality is obvious in the wild overtrading of fashionable stocks. A cluster of small stocks popular with retail tradershas often featured at the topof the most-traded lists this year, notablyGameStopandAMC Entertainmentbut also favorites such as Virgin Galactic andBlackBerry.\nIt is undeniable that stocks are far more expensive than usual. But bubbles usually involve lots of volatility as they inflate, not a calm exterior and turmoil within, because every little price drop is magnified by others fearful that the bubble is about to pop. In 1999 there were at least nine drops of more than 5% in the S&P 500, and from its intraday peak in July to the October low it fell 13%.\nThis time the most obvious threat to stocks is the Federal Reserve, rather than the market’s overvaluation. If the Fed raises rates, cash and bonds suddenly look much more attractive, and the TINA justification for buying extraordinarily expensive stocks is undermined.\n“You’ve got lots of volatility within the market but not a lot of volatility of the market,” says Robert Buckland, chief global equity strategist at Citigroup. “If there’s an alternative to just owning the index that could change.”\nThis month’s Fed scare showed just how sensitive stock prices are when it turns out there is an alternative to stocks, of sorts. The Fedraised rates fractionally off the floorby offering 0.05% instead of 0% on its cash-absorbing reverse repurchase agreements, a kind of overnight secured deposit, and instantly sucked in $235 billion extra. Talk of rate increases coming in two years instead of the three previously projected added to pressure on stocks, and the S&P fell just over 2% in three days before resuming its upward climb.\nIf that was the reaction to the Fed just barely doing something close to nothing, imagine how scared the market would be if the Fed started a normal rate hiking cycle and made cash attractive again. It isn’t something I think is likely soon, but the number one threat that could bring the turmoil from the depths to the surface of this market is the Fed.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"likeStatus":false,"favoriteStatus":false,"reportStatus":false,"tweetType":1,"langContent":"EN"},{"id":127252021,"gmtCreate":1624852692063,"gmtModify":1703846238761,"author":{"id":"3583058975336410","authorId":"3583058975336410","name":"Mel_888","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","vip":1,"crmLevel":3,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"idStr":"3583058975336410","authorIdStr":"3583058975336410"},"htmlText":"Yes","listText":"Yes","text":"Yes","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":4,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/127252021","repostId":1177492181,"repostType":2,"repost":{"id":"1177492181","kind":"news","pubTimestamp":1624849703,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/1177492181?lang=&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2021-06-28 11:08","market":"us","language":"en","title":"The Stock Market Hasn’t Been This Placid in Years","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1177492181","media":"WSJ","summary":"The U.S. stock marketis as calm as can beon the surface, while churning underneath more than it has ","content":"<p>The U.S. stock marketis as calm as can beon the surface, while churning underneath more than it has in decades.</p>\n<p>The S&amp;P 500 is so quiet it is almost disconcerting. The index hasn’t had a 5% correction based on closing prices since the end of October; no wonder the new day traders who started buying shares in lockdown think the market only goes up. The last time the S&amp;P was this serene for so long was in 2017, a period of calm that ended with the volatility crash early in 2018—although back then it was even quieter for much longer.</p>\n<p>Yet, look at the performance of types of stocks, and they have been swinging around much more than they usually do. Investors have been switching their bets between industries at a pace not seen outside of crises; March brought the biggest gap between the best and worst-performing sectors since 2002.</p>\n<p>The link between moves in growth stocks and cheap “value” stocks is the weakest—measured by the correlation—since 1995; investors are using them as proxies for betting for or against economic recovery.</p>\n<p>Meanwhile, big and small stocks last moved so independently of each other during the dot-com bubble of 2000, never a reassuring sign.</p>\n<p>I think this is another aspect of TINA: There Is No Alternative to stocks. With Treasurys, corporate bonds and cashoffering meager or zero return, stocks offer the best hope of gains. Investors who would previously have shifted money from stocks to bonds or vice versa now just switch from one sort of stock to another—so falls in one are offset by gains in another.</p>\n<p>There is no guarantee that it continues this way, of course. Bring enough fear into play and investors will bolt for the exits no matter how low cash yields are, just as they did in March last year. But while times seem pretty good, it is hard to justify buying a long-dated bond yielding far less than inflation. And times do seem pretty good.</p>\n<p>A widespread theory among those of a cautious disposition is that stocks just keep going up because a massive bubble has been inflated by cheap money and government stimulus. Stocks haven’t been so expensive since 2000, while a bubble mentality is obvious in the wild overtrading of fashionable stocks. A cluster of small stocks popular with retail tradershas often featured at the topof the most-traded lists this year, notablyGameStopandAMC Entertainmentbut also favorites such as Virgin Galactic andBlackBerry.</p>\n<p>It is undeniable that stocks are far more expensive than usual. But bubbles usually involve lots of volatility as they inflate, not a calm exterior and turmoil within, because every little price drop is magnified by others fearful that the bubble is about to pop. In 1999 there were at least nine drops of more than 5% in the S&amp;P 500, and from its intraday peak in July to the October low it fell 13%.</p>\n<p>This time the most obvious threat to stocks is the Federal Reserve, rather than the market’s overvaluation. If the Fed raises rates, cash and bonds suddenly look much more attractive, and the TINA justification for buying extraordinarily expensive stocks is undermined.</p>\n<p>“You’ve got lots of volatility within the market but not a lot of volatility of the market,” says Robert Buckland, chief global equity strategist at Citigroup. “If there’s an alternative to just owning the index that could change.”</p>\n<p>This month’s Fed scare showed just how sensitive stock prices are when it turns out there is an alternative to stocks, of sorts. The Fedraised rates fractionally off the floorby offering 0.05% instead of 0% on its cash-absorbing reverse repurchase agreements, a kind of overnight secured deposit, and instantly sucked in $235 billion extra. Talk of rate increases coming in two years instead of the three previously projected added to pressure on stocks, and the S&amp;P fell just over 2% in three days before resuming its upward climb.</p>\n<p>If that was the reaction to the Fed just barely doing something close to nothing, imagine how scared the market would be if the Fed started a normal rate hiking cycle and made cash attractive again. It isn’t something I think is likely soon, but the number one threat that could bring the turmoil from the depths to the surface of this market is the Fed.</p>","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>The Stock Market Hasn’t Been This Placid in Years</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 11px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;line-height: 11px;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nThe Stock Market Hasn’t Been This Placid in Years\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-06-28 11:08 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-stock-market-hasnt-been-this-placid-in-years-11624740199?mod=itp_wsj><strong>WSJ</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>The U.S. stock marketis as calm as can beon the surface, while churning underneath more than it has in decades.\nThe S&P 500 is so quiet it is almost disconcerting. The index hasn’t had a 5% correction...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-stock-market-hasnt-been-this-placid-in-years-11624740199?mod=itp_wsj\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{".DJI":"道琼斯"},"source_url":"https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-stock-market-hasnt-been-this-placid-in-years-11624740199?mod=itp_wsj","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1177492181","content_text":"The U.S. stock marketis as calm as can beon the surface, while churning underneath more than it has in decades.\nThe S&P 500 is so quiet it is almost disconcerting. The index hasn’t had a 5% correction based on closing prices since the end of October; no wonder the new day traders who started buying shares in lockdown think the market only goes up. The last time the S&P was this serene for so long was in 2017, a period of calm that ended with the volatility crash early in 2018—although back then it was even quieter for much longer.\nYet, look at the performance of types of stocks, and they have been swinging around much more than they usually do. Investors have been switching their bets between industries at a pace not seen outside of crises; March brought the biggest gap between the best and worst-performing sectors since 2002.\nThe link between moves in growth stocks and cheap “value” stocks is the weakest—measured by the correlation—since 1995; investors are using them as proxies for betting for or against economic recovery.\nMeanwhile, big and small stocks last moved so independently of each other during the dot-com bubble of 2000, never a reassuring sign.\nI think this is another aspect of TINA: There Is No Alternative to stocks. With Treasurys, corporate bonds and cashoffering meager or zero return, stocks offer the best hope of gains. Investors who would previously have shifted money from stocks to bonds or vice versa now just switch from one sort of stock to another—so falls in one are offset by gains in another.\nThere is no guarantee that it continues this way, of course. Bring enough fear into play and investors will bolt for the exits no matter how low cash yields are, just as they did in March last year. But while times seem pretty good, it is hard to justify buying a long-dated bond yielding far less than inflation. And times do seem pretty good.\nA widespread theory among those of a cautious disposition is that stocks just keep going up because a massive bubble has been inflated by cheap money and government stimulus. Stocks haven’t been so expensive since 2000, while a bubble mentality is obvious in the wild overtrading of fashionable stocks. A cluster of small stocks popular with retail tradershas often featured at the topof the most-traded lists this year, notablyGameStopandAMC Entertainmentbut also favorites such as Virgin Galactic andBlackBerry.\nIt is undeniable that stocks are far more expensive than usual. But bubbles usually involve lots of volatility as they inflate, not a calm exterior and turmoil within, because every little price drop is magnified by others fearful that the bubble is about to pop. In 1999 there were at least nine drops of more than 5% in the S&P 500, and from its intraday peak in July to the October low it fell 13%.\nThis time the most obvious threat to stocks is the Federal Reserve, rather than the market’s overvaluation. If the Fed raises rates, cash and bonds suddenly look much more attractive, and the TINA justification for buying extraordinarily expensive stocks is undermined.\n“You’ve got lots of volatility within the market but not a lot of volatility of the market,” says Robert Buckland, chief global equity strategist at Citigroup. “If there’s an alternative to just owning the index that could change.”\nThis month’s Fed scare showed just how sensitive stock prices are when it turns out there is an alternative to stocks, of sorts. The Fedraised rates fractionally off the floorby offering 0.05% instead of 0% on its cash-absorbing reverse repurchase agreements, a kind of overnight secured deposit, and instantly sucked in $235 billion extra. Talk of rate increases coming in two years instead of the three previously projected added to pressure on stocks, and the S&P fell just over 2% in three days before resuming its upward climb.\nIf that was the reaction to the Fed just barely doing something close to nothing, imagine how scared the market would be if the Fed started a normal rate hiking cycle and made cash attractive again. It isn’t something I think is likely soon, but the number one threat that could bring the turmoil from the depths to the surface of this market is the Fed.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"likeStatus":false,"favoriteStatus":false,"reportStatus":false,"tweetType":1,"langContent":"EN"},{"id":127229917,"gmtCreate":1624851766839,"gmtModify":1703846217596,"author":{"id":"3579748162894863","authorId":"3579748162894863","name":"YIPKF","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/cb307b178e826c212e864c04e7018162","vip":1,"crmLevel":2,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"idStr":"3579748162894863","authorIdStr":"3579748162894863"},"htmlText":"Good&nbsp;","listText":"Good&nbsp;","text":"Good","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":4,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/127229917","repostId":1177492181,"repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1177492181","kind":"news","pubTimestamp":1624849703,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/1177492181?lang=&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2021-06-28 11:08","market":"us","language":"en","title":"The Stock Market Hasn’t Been This Placid in Years","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1177492181","media":"WSJ","summary":"The U.S. stock marketis as calm as can beon the surface, while churning underneath more than it has ","content":"<p>The U.S. stock marketis as calm as can beon the surface, while churning underneath more than it has in decades.</p>\n<p>The S&amp;P 500 is so quiet it is almost disconcerting. The index hasn’t had a 5% correction based on closing prices since the end of October; no wonder the new day traders who started buying shares in lockdown think the market only goes up. The last time the S&amp;P was this serene for so long was in 2017, a period of calm that ended with the volatility crash early in 2018—although back then it was even quieter for much longer.</p>\n<p>Yet, look at the performance of types of stocks, and they have been swinging around much more than they usually do. Investors have been switching their bets between industries at a pace not seen outside of crises; March brought the biggest gap between the best and worst-performing sectors since 2002.</p>\n<p>The link between moves in growth stocks and cheap “value” stocks is the weakest—measured by the correlation—since 1995; investors are using them as proxies for betting for or against economic recovery.</p>\n<p>Meanwhile, big and small stocks last moved so independently of each other during the dot-com bubble of 2000, never a reassuring sign.</p>\n<p>I think this is another aspect of TINA: There Is No Alternative to stocks. With Treasurys, corporate bonds and cashoffering meager or zero return, stocks offer the best hope of gains. Investors who would previously have shifted money from stocks to bonds or vice versa now just switch from one sort of stock to another—so falls in one are offset by gains in another.</p>\n<p>There is no guarantee that it continues this way, of course. Bring enough fear into play and investors will bolt for the exits no matter how low cash yields are, just as they did in March last year. But while times seem pretty good, it is hard to justify buying a long-dated bond yielding far less than inflation. And times do seem pretty good.</p>\n<p>A widespread theory among those of a cautious disposition is that stocks just keep going up because a massive bubble has been inflated by cheap money and government stimulus. Stocks haven’t been so expensive since 2000, while a bubble mentality is obvious in the wild overtrading of fashionable stocks. A cluster of small stocks popular with retail tradershas often featured at the topof the most-traded lists this year, notablyGameStopandAMC Entertainmentbut also favorites such as Virgin Galactic andBlackBerry.</p>\n<p>It is undeniable that stocks are far more expensive than usual. But bubbles usually involve lots of volatility as they inflate, not a calm exterior and turmoil within, because every little price drop is magnified by others fearful that the bubble is about to pop. In 1999 there were at least nine drops of more than 5% in the S&amp;P 500, and from its intraday peak in July to the October low it fell 13%.</p>\n<p>This time the most obvious threat to stocks is the Federal Reserve, rather than the market’s overvaluation. If the Fed raises rates, cash and bonds suddenly look much more attractive, and the TINA justification for buying extraordinarily expensive stocks is undermined.</p>\n<p>“You’ve got lots of volatility within the market but not a lot of volatility of the market,” says Robert Buckland, chief global equity strategist at Citigroup. “If there’s an alternative to just owning the index that could change.”</p>\n<p>This month’s Fed scare showed just how sensitive stock prices are when it turns out there is an alternative to stocks, of sorts. The Fedraised rates fractionally off the floorby offering 0.05% instead of 0% on its cash-absorbing reverse repurchase agreements, a kind of overnight secured deposit, and instantly sucked in $235 billion extra. Talk of rate increases coming in two years instead of the three previously projected added to pressure on stocks, and the S&amp;P fell just over 2% in three days before resuming its upward climb.</p>\n<p>If that was the reaction to the Fed just barely doing something close to nothing, imagine how scared the market would be if the Fed started a normal rate hiking cycle and made cash attractive again. It isn’t something I think is likely soon, but the number one threat that could bring the turmoil from the depths to the surface of this market is the Fed.</p>","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>The Stock Market Hasn’t Been This Placid in Years</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 11px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;line-height: 11px;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nThe Stock Market Hasn’t Been This Placid in Years\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-06-28 11:08 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-stock-market-hasnt-been-this-placid-in-years-11624740199?mod=itp_wsj><strong>WSJ</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>The U.S. stock marketis as calm as can beon the surface, while churning underneath more than it has in decades.\nThe S&P 500 is so quiet it is almost disconcerting. The index hasn’t had a 5% correction...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-stock-market-hasnt-been-this-placid-in-years-11624740199?mod=itp_wsj\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{".DJI":"道琼斯"},"source_url":"https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-stock-market-hasnt-been-this-placid-in-years-11624740199?mod=itp_wsj","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1177492181","content_text":"The U.S. stock marketis as calm as can beon the surface, while churning underneath more than it has in decades.\nThe S&P 500 is so quiet it is almost disconcerting. The index hasn’t had a 5% correction based on closing prices since the end of October; no wonder the new day traders who started buying shares in lockdown think the market only goes up. The last time the S&P was this serene for so long was in 2017, a period of calm that ended with the volatility crash early in 2018—although back then it was even quieter for much longer.\nYet, look at the performance of types of stocks, and they have been swinging around much more than they usually do. Investors have been switching their bets between industries at a pace not seen outside of crises; March brought the biggest gap between the best and worst-performing sectors since 2002.\nThe link between moves in growth stocks and cheap “value” stocks is the weakest—measured by the correlation—since 1995; investors are using them as proxies for betting for or against economic recovery.\nMeanwhile, big and small stocks last moved so independently of each other during the dot-com bubble of 2000, never a reassuring sign.\nI think this is another aspect of TINA: There Is No Alternative to stocks. With Treasurys, corporate bonds and cashoffering meager or zero return, stocks offer the best hope of gains. Investors who would previously have shifted money from stocks to bonds or vice versa now just switch from one sort of stock to another—so falls in one are offset by gains in another.\nThere is no guarantee that it continues this way, of course. Bring enough fear into play and investors will bolt for the exits no matter how low cash yields are, just as they did in March last year. But while times seem pretty good, it is hard to justify buying a long-dated bond yielding far less than inflation. And times do seem pretty good.\nA widespread theory among those of a cautious disposition is that stocks just keep going up because a massive bubble has been inflated by cheap money and government stimulus. Stocks haven’t been so expensive since 2000, while a bubble mentality is obvious in the wild overtrading of fashionable stocks. A cluster of small stocks popular with retail tradershas often featured at the topof the most-traded lists this year, notablyGameStopandAMC Entertainmentbut also favorites such as Virgin Galactic andBlackBerry.\nIt is undeniable that stocks are far more expensive than usual. But bubbles usually involve lots of volatility as they inflate, not a calm exterior and turmoil within, because every little price drop is magnified by others fearful that the bubble is about to pop. In 1999 there were at least nine drops of more than 5% in the S&P 500, and from its intraday peak in July to the October low it fell 13%.\nThis time the most obvious threat to stocks is the Federal Reserve, rather than the market’s overvaluation. If the Fed raises rates, cash and bonds suddenly look much more attractive, and the TINA justification for buying extraordinarily expensive stocks is undermined.\n“You’ve got lots of volatility within the market but not a lot of volatility of the market,” says Robert Buckland, chief global equity strategist at Citigroup. “If there’s an alternative to just owning the index that could change.”\nThis month’s Fed scare showed just how sensitive stock prices are when it turns out there is an alternative to stocks, of sorts. The Fedraised rates fractionally off the floorby offering 0.05% instead of 0% on its cash-absorbing reverse repurchase agreements, a kind of overnight secured deposit, and instantly sucked in $235 billion extra. Talk of rate increases coming in two years instead of the three previously projected added to pressure on stocks, and the S&P fell just over 2% in three days before resuming its upward climb.\nIf that was the reaction to the Fed just barely doing something close to nothing, imagine how scared the market would be if the Fed started a normal rate hiking cycle and made cash attractive again. It isn’t something I think is likely soon, but the number one threat that could bring the turmoil from the depths to the surface of this market is the Fed.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"likeStatus":false,"favoriteStatus":false,"reportStatus":false,"tweetType":1,"langContent":"EN"},{"id":127220493,"gmtCreate":1624851763212,"gmtModify":1703846216947,"author":{"id":"3567153310963637","authorId":"3567153310963637","name":"Accccececdid","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","vip":1,"crmLevel":2,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"idStr":"3567153310963637","authorIdStr":"3567153310963637"},"htmlText":"Like n comment","listText":"Like n comment","text":"Like n comment","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":3,"commentSize":2,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/127220493","repostId":1177492181,"repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1177492181","kind":"news","pubTimestamp":1624849703,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/1177492181?lang=&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2021-06-28 11:08","market":"us","language":"en","title":"The Stock Market Hasn’t Been This Placid in Years","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1177492181","media":"WSJ","summary":"The U.S. stock marketis as calm as can beon the surface, while churning underneath more than it has ","content":"<p>The U.S. stock marketis as calm as can beon the surface, while churning underneath more than it has in decades.</p>\n<p>The S&amp;P 500 is so quiet it is almost disconcerting. The index hasn’t had a 5% correction based on closing prices since the end of October; no wonder the new day traders who started buying shares in lockdown think the market only goes up. The last time the S&amp;P was this serene for so long was in 2017, a period of calm that ended with the volatility crash early in 2018—although back then it was even quieter for much longer.</p>\n<p>Yet, look at the performance of types of stocks, and they have been swinging around much more than they usually do. Investors have been switching their bets between industries at a pace not seen outside of crises; March brought the biggest gap between the best and worst-performing sectors since 2002.</p>\n<p>The link between moves in growth stocks and cheap “value” stocks is the weakest—measured by the correlation—since 1995; investors are using them as proxies for betting for or against economic recovery.</p>\n<p>Meanwhile, big and small stocks last moved so independently of each other during the dot-com bubble of 2000, never a reassuring sign.</p>\n<p>I think this is another aspect of TINA: There Is No Alternative to stocks. With Treasurys, corporate bonds and cashoffering meager or zero return, stocks offer the best hope of gains. Investors who would previously have shifted money from stocks to bonds or vice versa now just switch from one sort of stock to another—so falls in one are offset by gains in another.</p>\n<p>There is no guarantee that it continues this way, of course. Bring enough fear into play and investors will bolt for the exits no matter how low cash yields are, just as they did in March last year. But while times seem pretty good, it is hard to justify buying a long-dated bond yielding far less than inflation. And times do seem pretty good.</p>\n<p>A widespread theory among those of a cautious disposition is that stocks just keep going up because a massive bubble has been inflated by cheap money and government stimulus. Stocks haven’t been so expensive since 2000, while a bubble mentality is obvious in the wild overtrading of fashionable stocks. A cluster of small stocks popular with retail tradershas often featured at the topof the most-traded lists this year, notablyGameStopandAMC Entertainmentbut also favorites such as Virgin Galactic andBlackBerry.</p>\n<p>It is undeniable that stocks are far more expensive than usual. But bubbles usually involve lots of volatility as they inflate, not a calm exterior and turmoil within, because every little price drop is magnified by others fearful that the bubble is about to pop. In 1999 there were at least nine drops of more than 5% in the S&amp;P 500, and from its intraday peak in July to the October low it fell 13%.</p>\n<p>This time the most obvious threat to stocks is the Federal Reserve, rather than the market’s overvaluation. If the Fed raises rates, cash and bonds suddenly look much more attractive, and the TINA justification for buying extraordinarily expensive stocks is undermined.</p>\n<p>“You’ve got lots of volatility within the market but not a lot of volatility of the market,” says Robert Buckland, chief global equity strategist at Citigroup. “If there’s an alternative to just owning the index that could change.”</p>\n<p>This month’s Fed scare showed just how sensitive stock prices are when it turns out there is an alternative to stocks, of sorts. The Fedraised rates fractionally off the floorby offering 0.05% instead of 0% on its cash-absorbing reverse repurchase agreements, a kind of overnight secured deposit, and instantly sucked in $235 billion extra. Talk of rate increases coming in two years instead of the three previously projected added to pressure on stocks, and the S&amp;P fell just over 2% in three days before resuming its upward climb.</p>\n<p>If that was the reaction to the Fed just barely doing something close to nothing, imagine how scared the market would be if the Fed started a normal rate hiking cycle and made cash attractive again. It isn’t something I think is likely soon, but the number one threat that could bring the turmoil from the depths to the surface of this market is the Fed.</p>","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>The Stock Market Hasn’t Been This Placid in Years</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 11px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;line-height: 11px;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nThe Stock Market Hasn’t Been This Placid in Years\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-06-28 11:08 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-stock-market-hasnt-been-this-placid-in-years-11624740199?mod=itp_wsj><strong>WSJ</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>The U.S. stock marketis as calm as can beon the surface, while churning underneath more than it has in decades.\nThe S&P 500 is so quiet it is almost disconcerting. The index hasn’t had a 5% correction...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-stock-market-hasnt-been-this-placid-in-years-11624740199?mod=itp_wsj\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{".DJI":"道琼斯"},"source_url":"https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-stock-market-hasnt-been-this-placid-in-years-11624740199?mod=itp_wsj","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1177492181","content_text":"The U.S. stock marketis as calm as can beon the surface, while churning underneath more than it has in decades.\nThe S&P 500 is so quiet it is almost disconcerting. The index hasn’t had a 5% correction based on closing prices since the end of October; no wonder the new day traders who started buying shares in lockdown think the market only goes up. The last time the S&P was this serene for so long was in 2017, a period of calm that ended with the volatility crash early in 2018—although back then it was even quieter for much longer.\nYet, look at the performance of types of stocks, and they have been swinging around much more than they usually do. Investors have been switching their bets between industries at a pace not seen outside of crises; March brought the biggest gap between the best and worst-performing sectors since 2002.\nThe link between moves in growth stocks and cheap “value” stocks is the weakest—measured by the correlation—since 1995; investors are using them as proxies for betting for or against economic recovery.\nMeanwhile, big and small stocks last moved so independently of each other during the dot-com bubble of 2000, never a reassuring sign.\nI think this is another aspect of TINA: There Is No Alternative to stocks. With Treasurys, corporate bonds and cashoffering meager or zero return, stocks offer the best hope of gains. Investors who would previously have shifted money from stocks to bonds or vice versa now just switch from one sort of stock to another—so falls in one are offset by gains in another.\nThere is no guarantee that it continues this way, of course. Bring enough fear into play and investors will bolt for the exits no matter how low cash yields are, just as they did in March last year. But while times seem pretty good, it is hard to justify buying a long-dated bond yielding far less than inflation. And times do seem pretty good.\nA widespread theory among those of a cautious disposition is that stocks just keep going up because a massive bubble has been inflated by cheap money and government stimulus. Stocks haven’t been so expensive since 2000, while a bubble mentality is obvious in the wild overtrading of fashionable stocks. A cluster of small stocks popular with retail tradershas often featured at the topof the most-traded lists this year, notablyGameStopandAMC Entertainmentbut also favorites such as Virgin Galactic andBlackBerry.\nIt is undeniable that stocks are far more expensive than usual. But bubbles usually involve lots of volatility as they inflate, not a calm exterior and turmoil within, because every little price drop is magnified by others fearful that the bubble is about to pop. In 1999 there were at least nine drops of more than 5% in the S&P 500, and from its intraday peak in July to the October low it fell 13%.\nThis time the most obvious threat to stocks is the Federal Reserve, rather than the market’s overvaluation. If the Fed raises rates, cash and bonds suddenly look much more attractive, and the TINA justification for buying extraordinarily expensive stocks is undermined.\n“You’ve got lots of volatility within the market but not a lot of volatility of the market,” says Robert Buckland, chief global equity strategist at Citigroup. “If there’s an alternative to just owning the index that could change.”\nThis month’s Fed scare showed just how sensitive stock prices are when it turns out there is an alternative to stocks, of sorts. The Fedraised rates fractionally off the floorby offering 0.05% instead of 0% on its cash-absorbing reverse repurchase agreements, a kind of overnight secured deposit, and instantly sucked in $235 billion extra. Talk of rate increases coming in two years instead of the three previously projected added to pressure on stocks, and the S&P fell just over 2% in three days before resuming its upward climb.\nIf that was the reaction to the Fed just barely doing something close to nothing, imagine how scared the market would be if the Fed started a normal rate hiking cycle and made cash attractive again. It isn’t something I think is likely soon, but the number one threat that could bring the turmoil from the depths to the surface of this market is the Fed.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"likeStatus":false,"favoriteStatus":false,"reportStatus":false,"tweetType":1,"comments":[{"id":5048730,"gmtCreate":1624857029525,"gmtModify":1663230178925,"authorId":3573721781255613,"author":{"id":3573721781255613,"idStr":"3573721781255613","authorId":3573721781255613,"name":"szueyann","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/cba9c6b1e785a9cf7301a7e6a2ff2354","vip":1,"crmLevel":2,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"individualDisplayBadges":[]},"repliedAuthorId":0,"objectId":127220493,"type":1,"supId":0,"prevId":0,"content":"<u>ok</u>","text":"<u>ok</u>","html":"<u>ok</u>"},{"id":5047839,"gmtCreate":1624852535406,"gmtModify":1663230176541,"authorId":3581675432544786,"author":{"id":3581675432544786,"idStr":"3581675432544786","authorId":3581675432544786,"name":"Fiona888","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/42688ec73bb74970876cdb05131f23f7","vip":1,"crmLevel":2,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"individualDisplayBadges":[]},"repliedAuthorId":0,"objectId":127220493,"type":1,"supId":0,"prevId":0,"content":"<u>ok</u>","text":"<u>ok</u>","html":"<u>ok</u>"}],"langContent":"EN"},{"id":127264463,"gmtCreate":1624851646952,"gmtModify":1703846214183,"author":{"id":"3581562365927542","authorId":"3581562365927542","name":"BBBBBBBBBB","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/973395458d7e1db24dbd4a689c79e8a2","vip":1,"crmLevel":3,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"idStr":"3581562365927542","authorIdStr":"3581562365927542"},"htmlText":"Why","listText":"Why","text":"Why","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":5,"commentSize":2,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/127264463","repostId":1177492181,"repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1177492181","kind":"news","pubTimestamp":1624849703,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/1177492181?lang=&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2021-06-28 11:08","market":"us","language":"en","title":"The Stock Market Hasn’t Been This Placid in Years","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1177492181","media":"WSJ","summary":"The U.S. stock marketis as calm as can beon the surface, while churning underneath more than it has ","content":"<p>The U.S. stock marketis as calm as can beon the surface, while churning underneath more than it has in decades.</p>\n<p>The S&amp;P 500 is so quiet it is almost disconcerting. The index hasn’t had a 5% correction based on closing prices since the end of October; no wonder the new day traders who started buying shares in lockdown think the market only goes up. The last time the S&amp;P was this serene for so long was in 2017, a period of calm that ended with the volatility crash early in 2018—although back then it was even quieter for much longer.</p>\n<p>Yet, look at the performance of types of stocks, and they have been swinging around much more than they usually do. Investors have been switching their bets between industries at a pace not seen outside of crises; March brought the biggest gap between the best and worst-performing sectors since 2002.</p>\n<p>The link between moves in growth stocks and cheap “value” stocks is the weakest—measured by the correlation—since 1995; investors are using them as proxies for betting for or against economic recovery.</p>\n<p>Meanwhile, big and small stocks last moved so independently of each other during the dot-com bubble of 2000, never a reassuring sign.</p>\n<p>I think this is another aspect of TINA: There Is No Alternative to stocks. With Treasurys, corporate bonds and cashoffering meager or zero return, stocks offer the best hope of gains. Investors who would previously have shifted money from stocks to bonds or vice versa now just switch from one sort of stock to another—so falls in one are offset by gains in another.</p>\n<p>There is no guarantee that it continues this way, of course. Bring enough fear into play and investors will bolt for the exits no matter how low cash yields are, just as they did in March last year. But while times seem pretty good, it is hard to justify buying a long-dated bond yielding far less than inflation. And times do seem pretty good.</p>\n<p>A widespread theory among those of a cautious disposition is that stocks just keep going up because a massive bubble has been inflated by cheap money and government stimulus. Stocks haven’t been so expensive since 2000, while a bubble mentality is obvious in the wild overtrading of fashionable stocks. A cluster of small stocks popular with retail tradershas often featured at the topof the most-traded lists this year, notablyGameStopandAMC Entertainmentbut also favorites such as Virgin Galactic andBlackBerry.</p>\n<p>It is undeniable that stocks are far more expensive than usual. But bubbles usually involve lots of volatility as they inflate, not a calm exterior and turmoil within, because every little price drop is magnified by others fearful that the bubble is about to pop. In 1999 there were at least nine drops of more than 5% in the S&amp;P 500, and from its intraday peak in July to the October low it fell 13%.</p>\n<p>This time the most obvious threat to stocks is the Federal Reserve, rather than the market’s overvaluation. If the Fed raises rates, cash and bonds suddenly look much more attractive, and the TINA justification for buying extraordinarily expensive stocks is undermined.</p>\n<p>“You’ve got lots of volatility within the market but not a lot of volatility of the market,” says Robert Buckland, chief global equity strategist at Citigroup. “If there’s an alternative to just owning the index that could change.”</p>\n<p>This month’s Fed scare showed just how sensitive stock prices are when it turns out there is an alternative to stocks, of sorts. The Fedraised rates fractionally off the floorby offering 0.05% instead of 0% on its cash-absorbing reverse repurchase agreements, a kind of overnight secured deposit, and instantly sucked in $235 billion extra. Talk of rate increases coming in two years instead of the three previously projected added to pressure on stocks, and the S&amp;P fell just over 2% in three days before resuming its upward climb.</p>\n<p>If that was the reaction to the Fed just barely doing something close to nothing, imagine how scared the market would be if the Fed started a normal rate hiking cycle and made cash attractive again. It isn’t something I think is likely soon, but the number one threat that could bring the turmoil from the depths to the surface of this market is the Fed.</p>","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>The Stock Market Hasn’t Been This Placid in Years</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 11px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;line-height: 11px;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nThe Stock Market Hasn’t Been This Placid in Years\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-06-28 11:08 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-stock-market-hasnt-been-this-placid-in-years-11624740199?mod=itp_wsj><strong>WSJ</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>The U.S. stock marketis as calm as can beon the surface, while churning underneath more than it has in decades.\nThe S&P 500 is so quiet it is almost disconcerting. The index hasn’t had a 5% correction...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-stock-market-hasnt-been-this-placid-in-years-11624740199?mod=itp_wsj\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{".DJI":"道琼斯"},"source_url":"https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-stock-market-hasnt-been-this-placid-in-years-11624740199?mod=itp_wsj","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1177492181","content_text":"The U.S. stock marketis as calm as can beon the surface, while churning underneath more than it has in decades.\nThe S&P 500 is so quiet it is almost disconcerting. The index hasn’t had a 5% correction based on closing prices since the end of October; no wonder the new day traders who started buying shares in lockdown think the market only goes up. The last time the S&P was this serene for so long was in 2017, a period of calm that ended with the volatility crash early in 2018—although back then it was even quieter for much longer.\nYet, look at the performance of types of stocks, and they have been swinging around much more than they usually do. Investors have been switching their bets between industries at a pace not seen outside of crises; March brought the biggest gap between the best and worst-performing sectors since 2002.\nThe link between moves in growth stocks and cheap “value” stocks is the weakest—measured by the correlation—since 1995; investors are using them as proxies for betting for or against economic recovery.\nMeanwhile, big and small stocks last moved so independently of each other during the dot-com bubble of 2000, never a reassuring sign.\nI think this is another aspect of TINA: There Is No Alternative to stocks. With Treasurys, corporate bonds and cashoffering meager or zero return, stocks offer the best hope of gains. Investors who would previously have shifted money from stocks to bonds or vice versa now just switch from one sort of stock to another—so falls in one are offset by gains in another.\nThere is no guarantee that it continues this way, of course. Bring enough fear into play and investors will bolt for the exits no matter how low cash yields are, just as they did in March last year. But while times seem pretty good, it is hard to justify buying a long-dated bond yielding far less than inflation. And times do seem pretty good.\nA widespread theory among those of a cautious disposition is that stocks just keep going up because a massive bubble has been inflated by cheap money and government stimulus. Stocks haven’t been so expensive since 2000, while a bubble mentality is obvious in the wild overtrading of fashionable stocks. A cluster of small stocks popular with retail tradershas often featured at the topof the most-traded lists this year, notablyGameStopandAMC Entertainmentbut also favorites such as Virgin Galactic andBlackBerry.\nIt is undeniable that stocks are far more expensive than usual. But bubbles usually involve lots of volatility as they inflate, not a calm exterior and turmoil within, because every little price drop is magnified by others fearful that the bubble is about to pop. In 1999 there were at least nine drops of more than 5% in the S&P 500, and from its intraday peak in July to the October low it fell 13%.\nThis time the most obvious threat to stocks is the Federal Reserve, rather than the market’s overvaluation. If the Fed raises rates, cash and bonds suddenly look much more attractive, and the TINA justification for buying extraordinarily expensive stocks is undermined.\n“You’ve got lots of volatility within the market but not a lot of volatility of the market,” says Robert Buckland, chief global equity strategist at Citigroup. “If there’s an alternative to just owning the index that could change.”\nThis month’s Fed scare showed just how sensitive stock prices are when it turns out there is an alternative to stocks, of sorts. The Fedraised rates fractionally off the floorby offering 0.05% instead of 0% on its cash-absorbing reverse repurchase agreements, a kind of overnight secured deposit, and instantly sucked in $235 billion extra. Talk of rate increases coming in two years instead of the three previously projected added to pressure on stocks, and the S&P fell just over 2% in three days before resuming its upward climb.\nIf that was the reaction to the Fed just barely doing something close to nothing, imagine how scared the market would be if the Fed started a normal rate hiking cycle and made cash attractive again. It isn’t something I think is likely soon, but the number one threat that could bring the turmoil from the depths to the surface of this market is the Fed.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"likeStatus":false,"favoriteStatus":false,"reportStatus":false,"tweetType":1,"comments":[{"id":5062945,"gmtCreate":1624934536719,"gmtModify":1663230248846,"authorId":3581588474178431,"author":{"id":3581588474178431,"idStr":"3581588474178431","authorId":3581588474178431,"name":"PanaCota","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","vip":1,"crmLevel":2,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"individualDisplayBadges":[]},"repliedAuthorId":0,"objectId":127264463,"type":1,"supId":0,"prevId":0,"content":"<u>ok</u>","text":"<u>ok</u>","html":"<u>ok</u>"},{"id":5048960,"gmtCreate":1624858350762,"gmtModify":1663230177934,"authorId":3581588474178431,"author":{"id":3581588474178431,"idStr":"3581588474178431","authorId":3581588474178431,"name":"PanaCota","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","vip":1,"crmLevel":2,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"individualDisplayBadges":[]},"repliedAuthorId":0,"objectId":127264463,"type":1,"supId":0,"prevId":0,"content":"<u>ok</u>","text":"<u>ok</u>","html":"<u>ok</u>"}],"langContent":"EN"},{"id":127265023,"gmtCreate":1624851511562,"gmtModify":1703846211583,"author":{"id":"3572852664461676","authorId":"3572852664461676","name":"Kaka1992","avatar":"https://community-static.tradeup.com/news/24a9621a076bbc73988073b20ed403fe","vip":1,"crmLevel":6,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"idStr":"3572852664461676","authorIdStr":"3572852664461676"},"htmlText":"Yes","listText":"Yes","text":"Yes","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":3,"commentSize":1,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/127265023","repostId":1177492181,"repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1177492181","kind":"news","pubTimestamp":1624849703,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/1177492181?lang=&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2021-06-28 11:08","market":"us","language":"en","title":"The Stock Market Hasn’t Been This Placid in Years","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1177492181","media":"WSJ","summary":"The U.S. stock marketis as calm as can beon the surface, while churning underneath more than it has ","content":"<p>The U.S. stock marketis as calm as can beon the surface, while churning underneath more than it has in decades.</p>\n<p>The S&amp;P 500 is so quiet it is almost disconcerting. The index hasn’t had a 5% correction based on closing prices since the end of October; no wonder the new day traders who started buying shares in lockdown think the market only goes up. The last time the S&amp;P was this serene for so long was in 2017, a period of calm that ended with the volatility crash early in 2018—although back then it was even quieter for much longer.</p>\n<p>Yet, look at the performance of types of stocks, and they have been swinging around much more than they usually do. Investors have been switching their bets between industries at a pace not seen outside of crises; March brought the biggest gap between the best and worst-performing sectors since 2002.</p>\n<p>The link between moves in growth stocks and cheap “value” stocks is the weakest—measured by the correlation—since 1995; investors are using them as proxies for betting for or against economic recovery.</p>\n<p>Meanwhile, big and small stocks last moved so independently of each other during the dot-com bubble of 2000, never a reassuring sign.</p>\n<p>I think this is another aspect of TINA: There Is No Alternative to stocks. With Treasurys, corporate bonds and cashoffering meager or zero return, stocks offer the best hope of gains. Investors who would previously have shifted money from stocks to bonds or vice versa now just switch from one sort of stock to another—so falls in one are offset by gains in another.</p>\n<p>There is no guarantee that it continues this way, of course. Bring enough fear into play and investors will bolt for the exits no matter how low cash yields are, just as they did in March last year. But while times seem pretty good, it is hard to justify buying a long-dated bond yielding far less than inflation. And times do seem pretty good.</p>\n<p>A widespread theory among those of a cautious disposition is that stocks just keep going up because a massive bubble has been inflated by cheap money and government stimulus. Stocks haven’t been so expensive since 2000, while a bubble mentality is obvious in the wild overtrading of fashionable stocks. A cluster of small stocks popular with retail tradershas often featured at the topof the most-traded lists this year, notablyGameStopandAMC Entertainmentbut also favorites such as Virgin Galactic andBlackBerry.</p>\n<p>It is undeniable that stocks are far more expensive than usual. But bubbles usually involve lots of volatility as they inflate, not a calm exterior and turmoil within, because every little price drop is magnified by others fearful that the bubble is about to pop. In 1999 there were at least nine drops of more than 5% in the S&amp;P 500, and from its intraday peak in July to the October low it fell 13%.</p>\n<p>This time the most obvious threat to stocks is the Federal Reserve, rather than the market’s overvaluation. If the Fed raises rates, cash and bonds suddenly look much more attractive, and the TINA justification for buying extraordinarily expensive stocks is undermined.</p>\n<p>“You’ve got lots of volatility within the market but not a lot of volatility of the market,” says Robert Buckland, chief global equity strategist at Citigroup. “If there’s an alternative to just owning the index that could change.”</p>\n<p>This month’s Fed scare showed just how sensitive stock prices are when it turns out there is an alternative to stocks, of sorts. The Fedraised rates fractionally off the floorby offering 0.05% instead of 0% on its cash-absorbing reverse repurchase agreements, a kind of overnight secured deposit, and instantly sucked in $235 billion extra. Talk of rate increases coming in two years instead of the three previously projected added to pressure on stocks, and the S&amp;P fell just over 2% in three days before resuming its upward climb.</p>\n<p>If that was the reaction to the Fed just barely doing something close to nothing, imagine how scared the market would be if the Fed started a normal rate hiking cycle and made cash attractive again. It isn’t something I think is likely soon, but the number one threat that could bring the turmoil from the depths to the surface of this market is the Fed.</p>","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>The Stock Market Hasn’t Been This Placid in Years</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 11px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;line-height: 11px;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nThe Stock Market Hasn’t Been This Placid in Years\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-06-28 11:08 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-stock-market-hasnt-been-this-placid-in-years-11624740199?mod=itp_wsj><strong>WSJ</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>The U.S. stock marketis as calm as can beon the surface, while churning underneath more than it has in decades.\nThe S&P 500 is so quiet it is almost disconcerting. The index hasn’t had a 5% correction...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-stock-market-hasnt-been-this-placid-in-years-11624740199?mod=itp_wsj\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{".DJI":"道琼斯"},"source_url":"https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-stock-market-hasnt-been-this-placid-in-years-11624740199?mod=itp_wsj","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1177492181","content_text":"The U.S. stock marketis as calm as can beon the surface, while churning underneath more than it has in decades.\nThe S&P 500 is so quiet it is almost disconcerting. The index hasn’t had a 5% correction based on closing prices since the end of October; no wonder the new day traders who started buying shares in lockdown think the market only goes up. The last time the S&P was this serene for so long was in 2017, a period of calm that ended with the volatility crash early in 2018—although back then it was even quieter for much longer.\nYet, look at the performance of types of stocks, and they have been swinging around much more than they usually do. Investors have been switching their bets between industries at a pace not seen outside of crises; March brought the biggest gap between the best and worst-performing sectors since 2002.\nThe link between moves in growth stocks and cheap “value” stocks is the weakest—measured by the correlation—since 1995; investors are using them as proxies for betting for or against economic recovery.\nMeanwhile, big and small stocks last moved so independently of each other during the dot-com bubble of 2000, never a reassuring sign.\nI think this is another aspect of TINA: There Is No Alternative to stocks. With Treasurys, corporate bonds and cashoffering meager or zero return, stocks offer the best hope of gains. Investors who would previously have shifted money from stocks to bonds or vice versa now just switch from one sort of stock to another—so falls in one are offset by gains in another.\nThere is no guarantee that it continues this way, of course. Bring enough fear into play and investors will bolt for the exits no matter how low cash yields are, just as they did in March last year. But while times seem pretty good, it is hard to justify buying a long-dated bond yielding far less than inflation. And times do seem pretty good.\nA widespread theory among those of a cautious disposition is that stocks just keep going up because a massive bubble has been inflated by cheap money and government stimulus. Stocks haven’t been so expensive since 2000, while a bubble mentality is obvious in the wild overtrading of fashionable stocks. A cluster of small stocks popular with retail tradershas often featured at the topof the most-traded lists this year, notablyGameStopandAMC Entertainmentbut also favorites such as Virgin Galactic andBlackBerry.\nIt is undeniable that stocks are far more expensive than usual. But bubbles usually involve lots of volatility as they inflate, not a calm exterior and turmoil within, because every little price drop is magnified by others fearful that the bubble is about to pop. In 1999 there were at least nine drops of more than 5% in the S&P 500, and from its intraday peak in July to the October low it fell 13%.\nThis time the most obvious threat to stocks is the Federal Reserve, rather than the market’s overvaluation. If the Fed raises rates, cash and bonds suddenly look much more attractive, and the TINA justification for buying extraordinarily expensive stocks is undermined.\n“You’ve got lots of volatility within the market but not a lot of volatility of the market,” says Robert Buckland, chief global equity strategist at Citigroup. “If there’s an alternative to just owning the index that could change.”\nThis month’s Fed scare showed just how sensitive stock prices are when it turns out there is an alternative to stocks, of sorts. The Fedraised rates fractionally off the floorby offering 0.05% instead of 0% on its cash-absorbing reverse repurchase agreements, a kind of overnight secured deposit, and instantly sucked in $235 billion extra. Talk of rate increases coming in two years instead of the three previously projected added to pressure on stocks, and the S&P fell just over 2% in three days before resuming its upward climb.\nIf that was the reaction to the Fed just barely doing something close to nothing, imagine how scared the market would be if the Fed started a normal rate hiking cycle and made cash attractive again. It isn’t something I think is likely soon, but the number one threat that could bring the turmoil from the depths to the surface of this market is the Fed.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"likeStatus":false,"favoriteStatus":false,"reportStatus":false,"tweetType":1,"comments":[{"id":5047678,"gmtCreate":1624851755756,"gmtModify":1663230172456,"authorId":3567153310963637,"author":{"id":3567153310963637,"idStr":"3567153310963637","authorId":3567153310963637,"name":"Accccececdid","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","vip":1,"crmLevel":2,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"individualDisplayBadges":[]},"repliedAuthorId":0,"objectId":127265023,"type":1,"supId":0,"prevId":0,"content":"Like n comment","text":"Like n comment","html":"Like n comment"}],"langContent":"EN"},{"id":127287222,"gmtCreate":1624851193266,"gmtModify":1703846200608,"author":{"id":"3580863560680452","authorId":"3580863560680452","name":"Canokira","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/0562a6b7ded0dcc81f834c3e023b803a","vip":1,"crmLevel":6,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"idStr":"3580863560680452","authorIdStr":"3580863560680452"},"htmlText":"Nice&nbsp;","listText":"Nice&nbsp;","text":"Nice","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/127287222","repostId":1177492181,"repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1177492181","kind":"news","pubTimestamp":1624849703,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/1177492181?lang=&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2021-06-28 11:08","market":"us","language":"en","title":"The Stock Market Hasn’t Been This Placid in Years","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1177492181","media":"WSJ","summary":"The U.S. stock marketis as calm as can beon the surface, while churning underneath more than it has ","content":"<p>The U.S. stock marketis as calm as can beon the surface, while churning underneath more than it has in decades.</p>\n<p>The S&amp;P 500 is so quiet it is almost disconcerting. The index hasn’t had a 5% correction based on closing prices since the end of October; no wonder the new day traders who started buying shares in lockdown think the market only goes up. The last time the S&amp;P was this serene for so long was in 2017, a period of calm that ended with the volatility crash early in 2018—although back then it was even quieter for much longer.</p>\n<p>Yet, look at the performance of types of stocks, and they have been swinging around much more than they usually do. Investors have been switching their bets between industries at a pace not seen outside of crises; March brought the biggest gap between the best and worst-performing sectors since 2002.</p>\n<p>The link between moves in growth stocks and cheap “value” stocks is the weakest—measured by the correlation—since 1995; investors are using them as proxies for betting for or against economic recovery.</p>\n<p>Meanwhile, big and small stocks last moved so independently of each other during the dot-com bubble of 2000, never a reassuring sign.</p>\n<p>I think this is another aspect of TINA: There Is No Alternative to stocks. With Treasurys, corporate bonds and cashoffering meager or zero return, stocks offer the best hope of gains. Investors who would previously have shifted money from stocks to bonds or vice versa now just switch from one sort of stock to another—so falls in one are offset by gains in another.</p>\n<p>There is no guarantee that it continues this way, of course. Bring enough fear into play and investors will bolt for the exits no matter how low cash yields are, just as they did in March last year. But while times seem pretty good, it is hard to justify buying a long-dated bond yielding far less than inflation. And times do seem pretty good.</p>\n<p>A widespread theory among those of a cautious disposition is that stocks just keep going up because a massive bubble has been inflated by cheap money and government stimulus. Stocks haven’t been so expensive since 2000, while a bubble mentality is obvious in the wild overtrading of fashionable stocks. A cluster of small stocks popular with retail tradershas often featured at the topof the most-traded lists this year, notablyGameStopandAMC Entertainmentbut also favorites such as Virgin Galactic andBlackBerry.</p>\n<p>It is undeniable that stocks are far more expensive than usual. But bubbles usually involve lots of volatility as they inflate, not a calm exterior and turmoil within, because every little price drop is magnified by others fearful that the bubble is about to pop. In 1999 there were at least nine drops of more than 5% in the S&amp;P 500, and from its intraday peak in July to the October low it fell 13%.</p>\n<p>This time the most obvious threat to stocks is the Federal Reserve, rather than the market’s overvaluation. If the Fed raises rates, cash and bonds suddenly look much more attractive, and the TINA justification for buying extraordinarily expensive stocks is undermined.</p>\n<p>“You’ve got lots of volatility within the market but not a lot of volatility of the market,” says Robert Buckland, chief global equity strategist at Citigroup. “If there’s an alternative to just owning the index that could change.”</p>\n<p>This month’s Fed scare showed just how sensitive stock prices are when it turns out there is an alternative to stocks, of sorts. The Fedraised rates fractionally off the floorby offering 0.05% instead of 0% on its cash-absorbing reverse repurchase agreements, a kind of overnight secured deposit, and instantly sucked in $235 billion extra. Talk of rate increases coming in two years instead of the three previously projected added to pressure on stocks, and the S&amp;P fell just over 2% in three days before resuming its upward climb.</p>\n<p>If that was the reaction to the Fed just barely doing something close to nothing, imagine how scared the market would be if the Fed started a normal rate hiking cycle and made cash attractive again. It isn’t something I think is likely soon, but the number one threat that could bring the turmoil from the depths to the surface of this market is the Fed.</p>","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>The Stock Market Hasn’t Been This Placid in Years</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 11px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;line-height: 11px;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nThe Stock Market Hasn’t Been This Placid in Years\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-06-28 11:08 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-stock-market-hasnt-been-this-placid-in-years-11624740199?mod=itp_wsj><strong>WSJ</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>The U.S. stock marketis as calm as can beon the surface, while churning underneath more than it has in decades.\nThe S&P 500 is so quiet it is almost disconcerting. The index hasn’t had a 5% correction...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-stock-market-hasnt-been-this-placid-in-years-11624740199?mod=itp_wsj\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{".DJI":"道琼斯"},"source_url":"https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-stock-market-hasnt-been-this-placid-in-years-11624740199?mod=itp_wsj","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1177492181","content_text":"The U.S. stock marketis as calm as can beon the surface, while churning underneath more than it has in decades.\nThe S&P 500 is so quiet it is almost disconcerting. The index hasn’t had a 5% correction based on closing prices since the end of October; no wonder the new day traders who started buying shares in lockdown think the market only goes up. The last time the S&P was this serene for so long was in 2017, a period of calm that ended with the volatility crash early in 2018—although back then it was even quieter for much longer.\nYet, look at the performance of types of stocks, and they have been swinging around much more than they usually do. Investors have been switching their bets between industries at a pace not seen outside of crises; March brought the biggest gap between the best and worst-performing sectors since 2002.\nThe link between moves in growth stocks and cheap “value” stocks is the weakest—measured by the correlation—since 1995; investors are using them as proxies for betting for or against economic recovery.\nMeanwhile, big and small stocks last moved so independently of each other during the dot-com bubble of 2000, never a reassuring sign.\nI think this is another aspect of TINA: There Is No Alternative to stocks. With Treasurys, corporate bonds and cashoffering meager or zero return, stocks offer the best hope of gains. Investors who would previously have shifted money from stocks to bonds or vice versa now just switch from one sort of stock to another—so falls in one are offset by gains in another.\nThere is no guarantee that it continues this way, of course. Bring enough fear into play and investors will bolt for the exits no matter how low cash yields are, just as they did in March last year. But while times seem pretty good, it is hard to justify buying a long-dated bond yielding far less than inflation. And times do seem pretty good.\nA widespread theory among those of a cautious disposition is that stocks just keep going up because a massive bubble has been inflated by cheap money and government stimulus. Stocks haven’t been so expensive since 2000, while a bubble mentality is obvious in the wild overtrading of fashionable stocks. A cluster of small stocks popular with retail tradershas often featured at the topof the most-traded lists this year, notablyGameStopandAMC Entertainmentbut also favorites such as Virgin Galactic andBlackBerry.\nIt is undeniable that stocks are far more expensive than usual. But bubbles usually involve lots of volatility as they inflate, not a calm exterior and turmoil within, because every little price drop is magnified by others fearful that the bubble is about to pop. In 1999 there were at least nine drops of more than 5% in the S&P 500, and from its intraday peak in July to the October low it fell 13%.\nThis time the most obvious threat to stocks is the Federal Reserve, rather than the market’s overvaluation. If the Fed raises rates, cash and bonds suddenly look much more attractive, and the TINA justification for buying extraordinarily expensive stocks is undermined.\n“You’ve got lots of volatility within the market but not a lot of volatility of the market,” says Robert Buckland, chief global equity strategist at Citigroup. “If there’s an alternative to just owning the index that could change.”\nThis month’s Fed scare showed just how sensitive stock prices are when it turns out there is an alternative to stocks, of sorts. The Fedraised rates fractionally off the floorby offering 0.05% instead of 0% on its cash-absorbing reverse repurchase agreements, a kind of overnight secured deposit, and instantly sucked in $235 billion extra. Talk of rate increases coming in two years instead of the three previously projected added to pressure on stocks, and the S&P fell just over 2% in three days before resuming its upward climb.\nIf that was the reaction to the Fed just barely doing something close to nothing, imagine how scared the market would be if the Fed started a normal rate hiking cycle and made cash attractive again. It isn’t something I think is likely soon, but the number one threat that could bring the turmoil from the depths to the surface of this market is the Fed.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"likeStatus":false,"favoriteStatus":false,"reportStatus":false,"tweetType":1,"langContent":"EN"},{"id":127286952,"gmtCreate":1624851009976,"gmtModify":1703846194253,"author":{"id":"3582188405911593","authorId":"3582188405911593","name":"TheIronCarro","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","vip":1,"hat":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/b073a07f77dbe6b3bec6b12311fde6bd","crmLevel":5,"crmLevelSwitch":1,"idStr":"3582188405911593","authorIdStr":"3582188405911593"},"htmlText":"No","listText":"No","text":"No","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":3,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/127286952","repostId":1177492181,"repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1177492181","kind":"news","pubTimestamp":1624849703,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/1177492181?lang=&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2021-06-28 11:08","market":"us","language":"en","title":"The Stock Market Hasn’t Been This Placid in Years","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1177492181","media":"WSJ","summary":"The U.S. stock marketis as calm as can beon the surface, while churning underneath more than it has ","content":"<p>The U.S. stock marketis as calm as can beon the surface, while churning underneath more than it has in decades.</p>\n<p>The S&amp;P 500 is so quiet it is almost disconcerting. The index hasn’t had a 5% correction based on closing prices since the end of October; no wonder the new day traders who started buying shares in lockdown think the market only goes up. The last time the S&amp;P was this serene for so long was in 2017, a period of calm that ended with the volatility crash early in 2018—although back then it was even quieter for much longer.</p>\n<p>Yet, look at the performance of types of stocks, and they have been swinging around much more than they usually do. Investors have been switching their bets between industries at a pace not seen outside of crises; March brought the biggest gap between the best and worst-performing sectors since 2002.</p>\n<p>The link between moves in growth stocks and cheap “value” stocks is the weakest—measured by the correlation—since 1995; investors are using them as proxies for betting for or against economic recovery.</p>\n<p>Meanwhile, big and small stocks last moved so independently of each other during the dot-com bubble of 2000, never a reassuring sign.</p>\n<p>I think this is another aspect of TINA: There Is No Alternative to stocks. With Treasurys, corporate bonds and cashoffering meager or zero return, stocks offer the best hope of gains. Investors who would previously have shifted money from stocks to bonds or vice versa now just switch from one sort of stock to another—so falls in one are offset by gains in another.</p>\n<p>There is no guarantee that it continues this way, of course. Bring enough fear into play and investors will bolt for the exits no matter how low cash yields are, just as they did in March last year. But while times seem pretty good, it is hard to justify buying a long-dated bond yielding far less than inflation. And times do seem pretty good.</p>\n<p>A widespread theory among those of a cautious disposition is that stocks just keep going up because a massive bubble has been inflated by cheap money and government stimulus. Stocks haven’t been so expensive since 2000, while a bubble mentality is obvious in the wild overtrading of fashionable stocks. A cluster of small stocks popular with retail tradershas often featured at the topof the most-traded lists this year, notablyGameStopandAMC Entertainmentbut also favorites such as Virgin Galactic andBlackBerry.</p>\n<p>It is undeniable that stocks are far more expensive than usual. But bubbles usually involve lots of volatility as they inflate, not a calm exterior and turmoil within, because every little price drop is magnified by others fearful that the bubble is about to pop. In 1999 there were at least nine drops of more than 5% in the S&amp;P 500, and from its intraday peak in July to the October low it fell 13%.</p>\n<p>This time the most obvious threat to stocks is the Federal Reserve, rather than the market’s overvaluation. If the Fed raises rates, cash and bonds suddenly look much more attractive, and the TINA justification for buying extraordinarily expensive stocks is undermined.</p>\n<p>“You’ve got lots of volatility within the market but not a lot of volatility of the market,” says Robert Buckland, chief global equity strategist at Citigroup. “If there’s an alternative to just owning the index that could change.”</p>\n<p>This month’s Fed scare showed just how sensitive stock prices are when it turns out there is an alternative to stocks, of sorts. The Fedraised rates fractionally off the floorby offering 0.05% instead of 0% on its cash-absorbing reverse repurchase agreements, a kind of overnight secured deposit, and instantly sucked in $235 billion extra. Talk of rate increases coming in two years instead of the three previously projected added to pressure on stocks, and the S&amp;P fell just over 2% in three days before resuming its upward climb.</p>\n<p>If that was the reaction to the Fed just barely doing something close to nothing, imagine how scared the market would be if the Fed started a normal rate hiking cycle and made cash attractive again. It isn’t something I think is likely soon, but the number one threat that could bring the turmoil from the depths to the surface of this market is the Fed.</p>","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>The Stock Market Hasn’t Been This Placid in Years</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 11px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;line-height: 11px;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nThe Stock Market Hasn’t Been This Placid in Years\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-06-28 11:08 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-stock-market-hasnt-been-this-placid-in-years-11624740199?mod=itp_wsj><strong>WSJ</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>The U.S. stock marketis as calm as can beon the surface, while churning underneath more than it has in decades.\nThe S&P 500 is so quiet it is almost disconcerting. The index hasn’t had a 5% correction...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-stock-market-hasnt-been-this-placid-in-years-11624740199?mod=itp_wsj\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{".DJI":"道琼斯"},"source_url":"https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-stock-market-hasnt-been-this-placid-in-years-11624740199?mod=itp_wsj","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1177492181","content_text":"The U.S. stock marketis as calm as can beon the surface, while churning underneath more than it has in decades.\nThe S&P 500 is so quiet it is almost disconcerting. The index hasn’t had a 5% correction based on closing prices since the end of October; no wonder the new day traders who started buying shares in lockdown think the market only goes up. The last time the S&P was this serene for so long was in 2017, a period of calm that ended with the volatility crash early in 2018—although back then it was even quieter for much longer.\nYet, look at the performance of types of stocks, and they have been swinging around much more than they usually do. Investors have been switching their bets between industries at a pace not seen outside of crises; March brought the biggest gap between the best and worst-performing sectors since 2002.\nThe link between moves in growth stocks and cheap “value” stocks is the weakest—measured by the correlation—since 1995; investors are using them as proxies for betting for or against economic recovery.\nMeanwhile, big and small stocks last moved so independently of each other during the dot-com bubble of 2000, never a reassuring sign.\nI think this is another aspect of TINA: There Is No Alternative to stocks. With Treasurys, corporate bonds and cashoffering meager or zero return, stocks offer the best hope of gains. Investors who would previously have shifted money from stocks to bonds or vice versa now just switch from one sort of stock to another—so falls in one are offset by gains in another.\nThere is no guarantee that it continues this way, of course. Bring enough fear into play and investors will bolt for the exits no matter how low cash yields are, just as they did in March last year. But while times seem pretty good, it is hard to justify buying a long-dated bond yielding far less than inflation. And times do seem pretty good.\nA widespread theory among those of a cautious disposition is that stocks just keep going up because a massive bubble has been inflated by cheap money and government stimulus. Stocks haven’t been so expensive since 2000, while a bubble mentality is obvious in the wild overtrading of fashionable stocks. A cluster of small stocks popular with retail tradershas often featured at the topof the most-traded lists this year, notablyGameStopandAMC Entertainmentbut also favorites such as Virgin Galactic andBlackBerry.\nIt is undeniable that stocks are far more expensive than usual. But bubbles usually involve lots of volatility as they inflate, not a calm exterior and turmoil within, because every little price drop is magnified by others fearful that the bubble is about to pop. In 1999 there were at least nine drops of more than 5% in the S&P 500, and from its intraday peak in July to the October low it fell 13%.\nThis time the most obvious threat to stocks is the Federal Reserve, rather than the market’s overvaluation. If the Fed raises rates, cash and bonds suddenly look much more attractive, and the TINA justification for buying extraordinarily expensive stocks is undermined.\n“You’ve got lots of volatility within the market but not a lot of volatility of the market,” says Robert Buckland, chief global equity strategist at Citigroup. “If there’s an alternative to just owning the index that could change.”\nThis month’s Fed scare showed just how sensitive stock prices are when it turns out there is an alternative to stocks, of sorts. The Fedraised rates fractionally off the floorby offering 0.05% instead of 0% on its cash-absorbing reverse repurchase agreements, a kind of overnight secured deposit, and instantly sucked in $235 billion extra. Talk of rate increases coming in two years instead of the three previously projected added to pressure on stocks, and the S&P fell just over 2% in three days before resuming its upward climb.\nIf that was the reaction to the Fed just barely doing something close to nothing, imagine how scared the market would be if the Fed started a normal rate hiking cycle and made cash attractive again. It isn’t something I think is likely soon, but the number one threat that could bring the turmoil from the depths to the surface of this market is the Fed.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"likeStatus":false,"favoriteStatus":false,"reportStatus":false,"tweetType":1,"langContent":"EN"},{"id":127281321,"gmtCreate":1624850901863,"gmtModify":1703846191656,"author":{"id":"3585192718156791","authorId":"3585192718156791","name":"yvneyng","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/76e9d3dda84e38df5f92fb2edf5f1be0","vip":1,"crmLevel":3,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"idStr":"3585192718156791","authorIdStr":"3585192718156791"},"htmlText":"Like and comment pls:)&nbsp;","listText":"Like and comment pls:)&nbsp;","text":"Like and comment pls:)","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":4,"commentSize":2,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/127281321","repostId":1177492181,"repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1177492181","kind":"news","pubTimestamp":1624849703,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/1177492181?lang=&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2021-06-28 11:08","market":"us","language":"en","title":"The Stock Market Hasn’t Been This Placid in Years","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1177492181","media":"WSJ","summary":"The U.S. stock marketis as calm as can beon the surface, while churning underneath more than it has ","content":"<p>The U.S. stock marketis as calm as can beon the surface, while churning underneath more than it has in decades.</p>\n<p>The S&amp;P 500 is so quiet it is almost disconcerting. The index hasn’t had a 5% correction based on closing prices since the end of October; no wonder the new day traders who started buying shares in lockdown think the market only goes up. The last time the S&amp;P was this serene for so long was in 2017, a period of calm that ended with the volatility crash early in 2018—although back then it was even quieter for much longer.</p>\n<p>Yet, look at the performance of types of stocks, and they have been swinging around much more than they usually do. Investors have been switching their bets between industries at a pace not seen outside of crises; March brought the biggest gap between the best and worst-performing sectors since 2002.</p>\n<p>The link between moves in growth stocks and cheap “value” stocks is the weakest—measured by the correlation—since 1995; investors are using them as proxies for betting for or against economic recovery.</p>\n<p>Meanwhile, big and small stocks last moved so independently of each other during the dot-com bubble of 2000, never a reassuring sign.</p>\n<p>I think this is another aspect of TINA: There Is No Alternative to stocks. With Treasurys, corporate bonds and cashoffering meager or zero return, stocks offer the best hope of gains. Investors who would previously have shifted money from stocks to bonds or vice versa now just switch from one sort of stock to another—so falls in one are offset by gains in another.</p>\n<p>There is no guarantee that it continues this way, of course. Bring enough fear into play and investors will bolt for the exits no matter how low cash yields are, just as they did in March last year. But while times seem pretty good, it is hard to justify buying a long-dated bond yielding far less than inflation. And times do seem pretty good.</p>\n<p>A widespread theory among those of a cautious disposition is that stocks just keep going up because a massive bubble has been inflated by cheap money and government stimulus. Stocks haven’t been so expensive since 2000, while a bubble mentality is obvious in the wild overtrading of fashionable stocks. A cluster of small stocks popular with retail tradershas often featured at the topof the most-traded lists this year, notablyGameStopandAMC Entertainmentbut also favorites such as Virgin Galactic andBlackBerry.</p>\n<p>It is undeniable that stocks are far more expensive than usual. But bubbles usually involve lots of volatility as they inflate, not a calm exterior and turmoil within, because every little price drop is magnified by others fearful that the bubble is about to pop. In 1999 there were at least nine drops of more than 5% in the S&amp;P 500, and from its intraday peak in July to the October low it fell 13%.</p>\n<p>This time the most obvious threat to stocks is the Federal Reserve, rather than the market’s overvaluation. If the Fed raises rates, cash and bonds suddenly look much more attractive, and the TINA justification for buying extraordinarily expensive stocks is undermined.</p>\n<p>“You’ve got lots of volatility within the market but not a lot of volatility of the market,” says Robert Buckland, chief global equity strategist at Citigroup. “If there’s an alternative to just owning the index that could change.”</p>\n<p>This month’s Fed scare showed just how sensitive stock prices are when it turns out there is an alternative to stocks, of sorts. The Fedraised rates fractionally off the floorby offering 0.05% instead of 0% on its cash-absorbing reverse repurchase agreements, a kind of overnight secured deposit, and instantly sucked in $235 billion extra. Talk of rate increases coming in two years instead of the three previously projected added to pressure on stocks, and the S&amp;P fell just over 2% in three days before resuming its upward climb.</p>\n<p>If that was the reaction to the Fed just barely doing something close to nothing, imagine how scared the market would be if the Fed started a normal rate hiking cycle and made cash attractive again. It isn’t something I think is likely soon, but the number one threat that could bring the turmoil from the depths to the surface of this market is the Fed.</p>","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>The Stock Market Hasn’t Been This Placid in Years</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 11px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;line-height: 11px;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nThe Stock Market Hasn’t Been This Placid in Years\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-06-28 11:08 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-stock-market-hasnt-been-this-placid-in-years-11624740199?mod=itp_wsj><strong>WSJ</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>The U.S. stock marketis as calm as can beon the surface, while churning underneath more than it has in decades.\nThe S&P 500 is so quiet it is almost disconcerting. The index hasn’t had a 5% correction...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-stock-market-hasnt-been-this-placid-in-years-11624740199?mod=itp_wsj\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{".DJI":"道琼斯"},"source_url":"https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-stock-market-hasnt-been-this-placid-in-years-11624740199?mod=itp_wsj","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1177492181","content_text":"The U.S. stock marketis as calm as can beon the surface, while churning underneath more than it has in decades.\nThe S&P 500 is so quiet it is almost disconcerting. The index hasn’t had a 5% correction based on closing prices since the end of October; no wonder the new day traders who started buying shares in lockdown think the market only goes up. The last time the S&P was this serene for so long was in 2017, a period of calm that ended with the volatility crash early in 2018—although back then it was even quieter for much longer.\nYet, look at the performance of types of stocks, and they have been swinging around much more than they usually do. Investors have been switching their bets between industries at a pace not seen outside of crises; March brought the biggest gap between the best and worst-performing sectors since 2002.\nThe link between moves in growth stocks and cheap “value” stocks is the weakest—measured by the correlation—since 1995; investors are using them as proxies for betting for or against economic recovery.\nMeanwhile, big and small stocks last moved so independently of each other during the dot-com bubble of 2000, never a reassuring sign.\nI think this is another aspect of TINA: There Is No Alternative to stocks. With Treasurys, corporate bonds and cashoffering meager or zero return, stocks offer the best hope of gains. Investors who would previously have shifted money from stocks to bonds or vice versa now just switch from one sort of stock to another—so falls in one are offset by gains in another.\nThere is no guarantee that it continues this way, of course. Bring enough fear into play and investors will bolt for the exits no matter how low cash yields are, just as they did in March last year. But while times seem pretty good, it is hard to justify buying a long-dated bond yielding far less than inflation. And times do seem pretty good.\nA widespread theory among those of a cautious disposition is that stocks just keep going up because a massive bubble has been inflated by cheap money and government stimulus. Stocks haven’t been so expensive since 2000, while a bubble mentality is obvious in the wild overtrading of fashionable stocks. A cluster of small stocks popular with retail tradershas often featured at the topof the most-traded lists this year, notablyGameStopandAMC Entertainmentbut also favorites such as Virgin Galactic andBlackBerry.\nIt is undeniable that stocks are far more expensive than usual. But bubbles usually involve lots of volatility as they inflate, not a calm exterior and turmoil within, because every little price drop is magnified by others fearful that the bubble is about to pop. In 1999 there were at least nine drops of more than 5% in the S&P 500, and from its intraday peak in July to the October low it fell 13%.\nThis time the most obvious threat to stocks is the Federal Reserve, rather than the market’s overvaluation. If the Fed raises rates, cash and bonds suddenly look much more attractive, and the TINA justification for buying extraordinarily expensive stocks is undermined.\n“You’ve got lots of volatility within the market but not a lot of volatility of the market,” says Robert Buckland, chief global equity strategist at Citigroup. “If there’s an alternative to just owning the index that could change.”\nThis month’s Fed scare showed just how sensitive stock prices are when it turns out there is an alternative to stocks, of sorts. The Fedraised rates fractionally off the floorby offering 0.05% instead of 0% on its cash-absorbing reverse repurchase agreements, a kind of overnight secured deposit, and instantly sucked in $235 billion extra. Talk of rate increases coming in two years instead of the three previously projected added to pressure on stocks, and the S&P fell just over 2% in three days before resuming its upward climb.\nIf that was the reaction to the Fed just barely doing something close to nothing, imagine how scared the market would be if the Fed started a normal rate hiking cycle and made cash attractive again. It isn’t something I think is likely soon, but the number one threat that could bring the turmoil from the depths to the surface of this market is the Fed.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"likeStatus":false,"favoriteStatus":false,"reportStatus":false,"tweetType":1,"comments":[{"id":5048733,"gmtCreate":1624857037155,"gmtModify":1663230177857,"authorId":3573721781255613,"author":{"id":3573721781255613,"idStr":"3573721781255613","authorId":3573721781255613,"name":"szueyann","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/cba9c6b1e785a9cf7301a7e6a2ff2354","vip":1,"crmLevel":2,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"individualDisplayBadges":[]},"repliedAuthorId":0,"objectId":127281321,"type":1,"supId":0,"prevId":0,"content":"<u>ok</u>","text":"<u>ok</u>","html":"<u>ok</u>"},{"id":5047522,"gmtCreate":1624851099955,"gmtModify":1663230174637,"authorId":3580348004146675,"author":{"id":3580348004146675,"idStr":"3580348004146675","authorId":3580348004146675,"name":"sugizoi4u","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/c7f987f771f67981d200c8f1cd598c70","vip":1,"crmLevel":1,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"individualDisplayBadges":[]},"repliedAuthorId":0,"objectId":127281321,"type":1,"supId":0,"prevId":0,"content":"Done","text":"Done","html":"Done"}],"langContent":"EN"},{"id":127283323,"gmtCreate":1624850876662,"gmtModify":1703846190523,"author":{"id":"3566006537043882","authorId":"3566006537043882","name":"SmallFishinS","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/c51afcb6f1af427421c29344227b56fe","vip":1,"crmLevel":2,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"idStr":"3566006537043882","authorIdStr":"3566006537043882"},"htmlText":"Ok","listText":"Ok","text":"Ok","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/127283323","repostId":1177492181,"repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1177492181","kind":"news","pubTimestamp":1624849703,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/1177492181?lang=&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2021-06-28 11:08","market":"us","language":"en","title":"The Stock Market Hasn’t Been This Placid in Years","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1177492181","media":"WSJ","summary":"The U.S. stock marketis as calm as can beon the surface, while churning underneath more than it has ","content":"<p>The U.S. stock marketis as calm as can beon the surface, while churning underneath more than it has in decades.</p>\n<p>The S&amp;P 500 is so quiet it is almost disconcerting. The index hasn’t had a 5% correction based on closing prices since the end of October; no wonder the new day traders who started buying shares in lockdown think the market only goes up. The last time the S&amp;P was this serene for so long was in 2017, a period of calm that ended with the volatility crash early in 2018—although back then it was even quieter for much longer.</p>\n<p>Yet, look at the performance of types of stocks, and they have been swinging around much more than they usually do. Investors have been switching their bets between industries at a pace not seen outside of crises; March brought the biggest gap between the best and worst-performing sectors since 2002.</p>\n<p>The link between moves in growth stocks and cheap “value” stocks is the weakest—measured by the correlation—since 1995; investors are using them as proxies for betting for or against economic recovery.</p>\n<p>Meanwhile, big and small stocks last moved so independently of each other during the dot-com bubble of 2000, never a reassuring sign.</p>\n<p>I think this is another aspect of TINA: There Is No Alternative to stocks. With Treasurys, corporate bonds and cashoffering meager or zero return, stocks offer the best hope of gains. Investors who would previously have shifted money from stocks to bonds or vice versa now just switch from one sort of stock to another—so falls in one are offset by gains in another.</p>\n<p>There is no guarantee that it continues this way, of course. Bring enough fear into play and investors will bolt for the exits no matter how low cash yields are, just as they did in March last year. But while times seem pretty good, it is hard to justify buying a long-dated bond yielding far less than inflation. And times do seem pretty good.</p>\n<p>A widespread theory among those of a cautious disposition is that stocks just keep going up because a massive bubble has been inflated by cheap money and government stimulus. Stocks haven’t been so expensive since 2000, while a bubble mentality is obvious in the wild overtrading of fashionable stocks. A cluster of small stocks popular with retail tradershas often featured at the topof the most-traded lists this year, notablyGameStopandAMC Entertainmentbut also favorites such as Virgin Galactic andBlackBerry.</p>\n<p>It is undeniable that stocks are far more expensive than usual. But bubbles usually involve lots of volatility as they inflate, not a calm exterior and turmoil within, because every little price drop is magnified by others fearful that the bubble is about to pop. In 1999 there were at least nine drops of more than 5% in the S&amp;P 500, and from its intraday peak in July to the October low it fell 13%.</p>\n<p>This time the most obvious threat to stocks is the Federal Reserve, rather than the market’s overvaluation. If the Fed raises rates, cash and bonds suddenly look much more attractive, and the TINA justification for buying extraordinarily expensive stocks is undermined.</p>\n<p>“You’ve got lots of volatility within the market but not a lot of volatility of the market,” says Robert Buckland, chief global equity strategist at Citigroup. “If there’s an alternative to just owning the index that could change.”</p>\n<p>This month’s Fed scare showed just how sensitive stock prices are when it turns out there is an alternative to stocks, of sorts. The Fedraised rates fractionally off the floorby offering 0.05% instead of 0% on its cash-absorbing reverse repurchase agreements, a kind of overnight secured deposit, and instantly sucked in $235 billion extra. Talk of rate increases coming in two years instead of the three previously projected added to pressure on stocks, and the S&amp;P fell just over 2% in three days before resuming its upward climb.</p>\n<p>If that was the reaction to the Fed just barely doing something close to nothing, imagine how scared the market would be if the Fed started a normal rate hiking cycle and made cash attractive again. It isn’t something I think is likely soon, but the number one threat that could bring the turmoil from the depths to the surface of this market is the Fed.</p>","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>The Stock Market Hasn’t Been This Placid in Years</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 11px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;line-height: 11px;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nThe Stock Market Hasn’t Been This Placid in Years\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-06-28 11:08 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-stock-market-hasnt-been-this-placid-in-years-11624740199?mod=itp_wsj><strong>WSJ</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>The U.S. stock marketis as calm as can beon the surface, while churning underneath more than it has in decades.\nThe S&P 500 is so quiet it is almost disconcerting. The index hasn’t had a 5% correction...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-stock-market-hasnt-been-this-placid-in-years-11624740199?mod=itp_wsj\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{".DJI":"道琼斯"},"source_url":"https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-stock-market-hasnt-been-this-placid-in-years-11624740199?mod=itp_wsj","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1177492181","content_text":"The U.S. stock marketis as calm as can beon the surface, while churning underneath more than it has in decades.\nThe S&P 500 is so quiet it is almost disconcerting. The index hasn’t had a 5% correction based on closing prices since the end of October; no wonder the new day traders who started buying shares in lockdown think the market only goes up. The last time the S&P was this serene for so long was in 2017, a period of calm that ended with the volatility crash early in 2018—although back then it was even quieter for much longer.\nYet, look at the performance of types of stocks, and they have been swinging around much more than they usually do. Investors have been switching their bets between industries at a pace not seen outside of crises; March brought the biggest gap between the best and worst-performing sectors since 2002.\nThe link between moves in growth stocks and cheap “value” stocks is the weakest—measured by the correlation—since 1995; investors are using them as proxies for betting for or against economic recovery.\nMeanwhile, big and small stocks last moved so independently of each other during the dot-com bubble of 2000, never a reassuring sign.\nI think this is another aspect of TINA: There Is No Alternative to stocks. With Treasurys, corporate bonds and cashoffering meager or zero return, stocks offer the best hope of gains. Investors who would previously have shifted money from stocks to bonds or vice versa now just switch from one sort of stock to another—so falls in one are offset by gains in another.\nThere is no guarantee that it continues this way, of course. Bring enough fear into play and investors will bolt for the exits no matter how low cash yields are, just as they did in March last year. But while times seem pretty good, it is hard to justify buying a long-dated bond yielding far less than inflation. And times do seem pretty good.\nA widespread theory among those of a cautious disposition is that stocks just keep going up because a massive bubble has been inflated by cheap money and government stimulus. Stocks haven’t been so expensive since 2000, while a bubble mentality is obvious in the wild overtrading of fashionable stocks. A cluster of small stocks popular with retail tradershas often featured at the topof the most-traded lists this year, notablyGameStopandAMC Entertainmentbut also favorites such as Virgin Galactic andBlackBerry.\nIt is undeniable that stocks are far more expensive than usual. But bubbles usually involve lots of volatility as they inflate, not a calm exterior and turmoil within, because every little price drop is magnified by others fearful that the bubble is about to pop. In 1999 there were at least nine drops of more than 5% in the S&P 500, and from its intraday peak in July to the October low it fell 13%.\nThis time the most obvious threat to stocks is the Federal Reserve, rather than the market’s overvaluation. If the Fed raises rates, cash and bonds suddenly look much more attractive, and the TINA justification for buying extraordinarily expensive stocks is undermined.\n“You’ve got lots of volatility within the market but not a lot of volatility of the market,” says Robert Buckland, chief global equity strategist at Citigroup. “If there’s an alternative to just owning the index that could change.”\nThis month’s Fed scare showed just how sensitive stock prices are when it turns out there is an alternative to stocks, of sorts. The Fedraised rates fractionally off the floorby offering 0.05% instead of 0% on its cash-absorbing reverse repurchase agreements, a kind of overnight secured deposit, and instantly sucked in $235 billion extra. Talk of rate increases coming in two years instead of the three previously projected added to pressure on stocks, and the S&P fell just over 2% in three days before resuming its upward climb.\nIf that was the reaction to the Fed just barely doing something close to nothing, imagine how scared the market would be if the Fed started a normal rate hiking cycle and made cash attractive again. It isn’t something I think is likely soon, but the number one threat that could bring the turmoil from the depths to the surface of this market is the Fed.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"likeStatus":false,"favoriteStatus":false,"reportStatus":false,"tweetType":1,"langContent":"EN"},{"id":127289760,"gmtCreate":1624850863650,"gmtModify":1703846189704,"author":{"id":"3580038205931657","authorId":"3580038205931657","name":"Jarkkhron","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","vip":1,"crmLevel":4,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"idStr":"3580038205931657","authorIdStr":"3580038205931657"},"htmlText":"Like","listText":"Like","text":"Like","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/127289760","repostId":1177492181,"repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1177492181","kind":"news","pubTimestamp":1624849703,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/1177492181?lang=&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2021-06-28 11:08","market":"us","language":"en","title":"The Stock Market Hasn’t Been This Placid in Years","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1177492181","media":"WSJ","summary":"The U.S. stock marketis as calm as can beon the surface, while churning underneath more than it has ","content":"<p>The U.S. stock marketis as calm as can beon the surface, while churning underneath more than it has in decades.</p>\n<p>The S&amp;P 500 is so quiet it is almost disconcerting. The index hasn’t had a 5% correction based on closing prices since the end of October; no wonder the new day traders who started buying shares in lockdown think the market only goes up. The last time the S&amp;P was this serene for so long was in 2017, a period of calm that ended with the volatility crash early in 2018—although back then it was even quieter for much longer.</p>\n<p>Yet, look at the performance of types of stocks, and they have been swinging around much more than they usually do. Investors have been switching their bets between industries at a pace not seen outside of crises; March brought the biggest gap between the best and worst-performing sectors since 2002.</p>\n<p>The link between moves in growth stocks and cheap “value” stocks is the weakest—measured by the correlation—since 1995; investors are using them as proxies for betting for or against economic recovery.</p>\n<p>Meanwhile, big and small stocks last moved so independently of each other during the dot-com bubble of 2000, never a reassuring sign.</p>\n<p>I think this is another aspect of TINA: There Is No Alternative to stocks. With Treasurys, corporate bonds and cashoffering meager or zero return, stocks offer the best hope of gains. Investors who would previously have shifted money from stocks to bonds or vice versa now just switch from one sort of stock to another—so falls in one are offset by gains in another.</p>\n<p>There is no guarantee that it continues this way, of course. Bring enough fear into play and investors will bolt for the exits no matter how low cash yields are, just as they did in March last year. But while times seem pretty good, it is hard to justify buying a long-dated bond yielding far less than inflation. And times do seem pretty good.</p>\n<p>A widespread theory among those of a cautious disposition is that stocks just keep going up because a massive bubble has been inflated by cheap money and government stimulus. Stocks haven’t been so expensive since 2000, while a bubble mentality is obvious in the wild overtrading of fashionable stocks. A cluster of small stocks popular with retail tradershas often featured at the topof the most-traded lists this year, notablyGameStopandAMC Entertainmentbut also favorites such as Virgin Galactic andBlackBerry.</p>\n<p>It is undeniable that stocks are far more expensive than usual. But bubbles usually involve lots of volatility as they inflate, not a calm exterior and turmoil within, because every little price drop is magnified by others fearful that the bubble is about to pop. In 1999 there were at least nine drops of more than 5% in the S&amp;P 500, and from its intraday peak in July to the October low it fell 13%.</p>\n<p>This time the most obvious threat to stocks is the Federal Reserve, rather than the market’s overvaluation. If the Fed raises rates, cash and bonds suddenly look much more attractive, and the TINA justification for buying extraordinarily expensive stocks is undermined.</p>\n<p>“You’ve got lots of volatility within the market but not a lot of volatility of the market,” says Robert Buckland, chief global equity strategist at Citigroup. “If there’s an alternative to just owning the index that could change.”</p>\n<p>This month’s Fed scare showed just how sensitive stock prices are when it turns out there is an alternative to stocks, of sorts. The Fedraised rates fractionally off the floorby offering 0.05% instead of 0% on its cash-absorbing reverse repurchase agreements, a kind of overnight secured deposit, and instantly sucked in $235 billion extra. Talk of rate increases coming in two years instead of the three previously projected added to pressure on stocks, and the S&amp;P fell just over 2% in three days before resuming its upward climb.</p>\n<p>If that was the reaction to the Fed just barely doing something close to nothing, imagine how scared the market would be if the Fed started a normal rate hiking cycle and made cash attractive again. It isn’t something I think is likely soon, but the number one threat that could bring the turmoil from the depths to the surface of this market is the Fed.</p>","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>The Stock Market Hasn’t Been This Placid in Years</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 11px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;line-height: 11px;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nThe Stock Market Hasn’t Been This Placid in Years\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-06-28 11:08 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-stock-market-hasnt-been-this-placid-in-years-11624740199?mod=itp_wsj><strong>WSJ</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>The U.S. stock marketis as calm as can beon the surface, while churning underneath more than it has in decades.\nThe S&P 500 is so quiet it is almost disconcerting. The index hasn’t had a 5% correction...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-stock-market-hasnt-been-this-placid-in-years-11624740199?mod=itp_wsj\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{".DJI":"道琼斯"},"source_url":"https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-stock-market-hasnt-been-this-placid-in-years-11624740199?mod=itp_wsj","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1177492181","content_text":"The U.S. stock marketis as calm as can beon the surface, while churning underneath more than it has in decades.\nThe S&P 500 is so quiet it is almost disconcerting. The index hasn’t had a 5% correction based on closing prices since the end of October; no wonder the new day traders who started buying shares in lockdown think the market only goes up. The last time the S&P was this serene for so long was in 2017, a period of calm that ended with the volatility crash early in 2018—although back then it was even quieter for much longer.\nYet, look at the performance of types of stocks, and they have been swinging around much more than they usually do. Investors have been switching their bets between industries at a pace not seen outside of crises; March brought the biggest gap between the best and worst-performing sectors since 2002.\nThe link between moves in growth stocks and cheap “value” stocks is the weakest—measured by the correlation—since 1995; investors are using them as proxies for betting for or against economic recovery.\nMeanwhile, big and small stocks last moved so independently of each other during the dot-com bubble of 2000, never a reassuring sign.\nI think this is another aspect of TINA: There Is No Alternative to stocks. With Treasurys, corporate bonds and cashoffering meager or zero return, stocks offer the best hope of gains. Investors who would previously have shifted money from stocks to bonds or vice versa now just switch from one sort of stock to another—so falls in one are offset by gains in another.\nThere is no guarantee that it continues this way, of course. Bring enough fear into play and investors will bolt for the exits no matter how low cash yields are, just as they did in March last year. But while times seem pretty good, it is hard to justify buying a long-dated bond yielding far less than inflation. And times do seem pretty good.\nA widespread theory among those of a cautious disposition is that stocks just keep going up because a massive bubble has been inflated by cheap money and government stimulus. Stocks haven’t been so expensive since 2000, while a bubble mentality is obvious in the wild overtrading of fashionable stocks. A cluster of small stocks popular with retail tradershas often featured at the topof the most-traded lists this year, notablyGameStopandAMC Entertainmentbut also favorites such as Virgin Galactic andBlackBerry.\nIt is undeniable that stocks are far more expensive than usual. But bubbles usually involve lots of volatility as they inflate, not a calm exterior and turmoil within, because every little price drop is magnified by others fearful that the bubble is about to pop. In 1999 there were at least nine drops of more than 5% in the S&P 500, and from its intraday peak in July to the October low it fell 13%.\nThis time the most obvious threat to stocks is the Federal Reserve, rather than the market’s overvaluation. If the Fed raises rates, cash and bonds suddenly look much more attractive, and the TINA justification for buying extraordinarily expensive stocks is undermined.\n“You’ve got lots of volatility within the market but not a lot of volatility of the market,” says Robert Buckland, chief global equity strategist at Citigroup. “If there’s an alternative to just owning the index that could change.”\nThis month’s Fed scare showed just how sensitive stock prices are when it turns out there is an alternative to stocks, of sorts. The Fedraised rates fractionally off the floorby offering 0.05% instead of 0% on its cash-absorbing reverse repurchase agreements, a kind of overnight secured deposit, and instantly sucked in $235 billion extra. Talk of rate increases coming in two years instead of the three previously projected added to pressure on stocks, and the S&P fell just over 2% in three days before resuming its upward climb.\nIf that was the reaction to the Fed just barely doing something close to nothing, imagine how scared the market would be if the Fed started a normal rate hiking cycle and made cash attractive again. It isn’t something I think is likely soon, but the number one threat that could bring the turmoil from the depths to the surface of this market is the Fed.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"likeStatus":false,"favoriteStatus":false,"reportStatus":false,"tweetType":1,"langContent":"EN"},{"id":127289093,"gmtCreate":1624850833012,"gmtModify":1703846188568,"author":{"id":"3578015815185358","authorId":"3578015815185358","name":"edgewise","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/664c6f8be63b9573d7f1fa2cb5ba1021","vip":1,"crmLevel":5,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"idStr":"3578015815185358","authorIdStr":"3578015815185358"},"htmlText":"Buy or sell?","listText":"Buy or sell?","text":"Buy or sell?","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/127289093","repostId":1177492181,"repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1177492181","kind":"news","pubTimestamp":1624849703,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/1177492181?lang=&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2021-06-28 11:08","market":"us","language":"en","title":"The Stock Market Hasn’t Been This Placid in Years","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1177492181","media":"WSJ","summary":"The U.S. stock marketis as calm as can beon the surface, while churning underneath more than it has ","content":"<p>The U.S. stock marketis as calm as can beon the surface, while churning underneath more than it has in decades.</p>\n<p>The S&amp;P 500 is so quiet it is almost disconcerting. The index hasn’t had a 5% correction based on closing prices since the end of October; no wonder the new day traders who started buying shares in lockdown think the market only goes up. The last time the S&amp;P was this serene for so long was in 2017, a period of calm that ended with the volatility crash early in 2018—although back then it was even quieter for much longer.</p>\n<p>Yet, look at the performance of types of stocks, and they have been swinging around much more than they usually do. Investors have been switching their bets between industries at a pace not seen outside of crises; March brought the biggest gap between the best and worst-performing sectors since 2002.</p>\n<p>The link between moves in growth stocks and cheap “value” stocks is the weakest—measured by the correlation—since 1995; investors are using them as proxies for betting for or against economic recovery.</p>\n<p>Meanwhile, big and small stocks last moved so independently of each other during the dot-com bubble of 2000, never a reassuring sign.</p>\n<p>I think this is another aspect of TINA: There Is No Alternative to stocks. With Treasurys, corporate bonds and cashoffering meager or zero return, stocks offer the best hope of gains. Investors who would previously have shifted money from stocks to bonds or vice versa now just switch from one sort of stock to another—so falls in one are offset by gains in another.</p>\n<p>There is no guarantee that it continues this way, of course. Bring enough fear into play and investors will bolt for the exits no matter how low cash yields are, just as they did in March last year. But while times seem pretty good, it is hard to justify buying a long-dated bond yielding far less than inflation. And times do seem pretty good.</p>\n<p>A widespread theory among those of a cautious disposition is that stocks just keep going up because a massive bubble has been inflated by cheap money and government stimulus. Stocks haven’t been so expensive since 2000, while a bubble mentality is obvious in the wild overtrading of fashionable stocks. A cluster of small stocks popular with retail tradershas often featured at the topof the most-traded lists this year, notablyGameStopandAMC Entertainmentbut also favorites such as Virgin Galactic andBlackBerry.</p>\n<p>It is undeniable that stocks are far more expensive than usual. But bubbles usually involve lots of volatility as they inflate, not a calm exterior and turmoil within, because every little price drop is magnified by others fearful that the bubble is about to pop. In 1999 there were at least nine drops of more than 5% in the S&amp;P 500, and from its intraday peak in July to the October low it fell 13%.</p>\n<p>This time the most obvious threat to stocks is the Federal Reserve, rather than the market’s overvaluation. If the Fed raises rates, cash and bonds suddenly look much more attractive, and the TINA justification for buying extraordinarily expensive stocks is undermined.</p>\n<p>“You’ve got lots of volatility within the market but not a lot of volatility of the market,” says Robert Buckland, chief global equity strategist at Citigroup. “If there’s an alternative to just owning the index that could change.”</p>\n<p>This month’s Fed scare showed just how sensitive stock prices are when it turns out there is an alternative to stocks, of sorts. The Fedraised rates fractionally off the floorby offering 0.05% instead of 0% on its cash-absorbing reverse repurchase agreements, a kind of overnight secured deposit, and instantly sucked in $235 billion extra. Talk of rate increases coming in two years instead of the three previously projected added to pressure on stocks, and the S&amp;P fell just over 2% in three days before resuming its upward climb.</p>\n<p>If that was the reaction to the Fed just barely doing something close to nothing, imagine how scared the market would be if the Fed started a normal rate hiking cycle and made cash attractive again. It isn’t something I think is likely soon, but the number one threat that could bring the turmoil from the depths to the surface of this market is the Fed.</p>","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>The Stock Market Hasn’t Been This Placid in Years</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 11px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;line-height: 11px;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nThe Stock Market Hasn’t Been This Placid in Years\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-06-28 11:08 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-stock-market-hasnt-been-this-placid-in-years-11624740199?mod=itp_wsj><strong>WSJ</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>The U.S. stock marketis as calm as can beon the surface, while churning underneath more than it has in decades.\nThe S&P 500 is so quiet it is almost disconcerting. The index hasn’t had a 5% correction...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-stock-market-hasnt-been-this-placid-in-years-11624740199?mod=itp_wsj\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{".DJI":"道琼斯"},"source_url":"https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-stock-market-hasnt-been-this-placid-in-years-11624740199?mod=itp_wsj","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1177492181","content_text":"The U.S. stock marketis as calm as can beon the surface, while churning underneath more than it has in decades.\nThe S&P 500 is so quiet it is almost disconcerting. The index hasn’t had a 5% correction based on closing prices since the end of October; no wonder the new day traders who started buying shares in lockdown think the market only goes up. The last time the S&P was this serene for so long was in 2017, a period of calm that ended with the volatility crash early in 2018—although back then it was even quieter for much longer.\nYet, look at the performance of types of stocks, and they have been swinging around much more than they usually do. Investors have been switching their bets between industries at a pace not seen outside of crises; March brought the biggest gap between the best and worst-performing sectors since 2002.\nThe link between moves in growth stocks and cheap “value” stocks is the weakest—measured by the correlation—since 1995; investors are using them as proxies for betting for or against economic recovery.\nMeanwhile, big and small stocks last moved so independently of each other during the dot-com bubble of 2000, never a reassuring sign.\nI think this is another aspect of TINA: There Is No Alternative to stocks. With Treasurys, corporate bonds and cashoffering meager or zero return, stocks offer the best hope of gains. Investors who would previously have shifted money from stocks to bonds or vice versa now just switch from one sort of stock to another—so falls in one are offset by gains in another.\nThere is no guarantee that it continues this way, of course. Bring enough fear into play and investors will bolt for the exits no matter how low cash yields are, just as they did in March last year. But while times seem pretty good, it is hard to justify buying a long-dated bond yielding far less than inflation. And times do seem pretty good.\nA widespread theory among those of a cautious disposition is that stocks just keep going up because a massive bubble has been inflated by cheap money and government stimulus. Stocks haven’t been so expensive since 2000, while a bubble mentality is obvious in the wild overtrading of fashionable stocks. A cluster of small stocks popular with retail tradershas often featured at the topof the most-traded lists this year, notablyGameStopandAMC Entertainmentbut also favorites such as Virgin Galactic andBlackBerry.\nIt is undeniable that stocks are far more expensive than usual. But bubbles usually involve lots of volatility as they inflate, not a calm exterior and turmoil within, because every little price drop is magnified by others fearful that the bubble is about to pop. In 1999 there were at least nine drops of more than 5% in the S&P 500, and from its intraday peak in July to the October low it fell 13%.\nThis time the most obvious threat to stocks is the Federal Reserve, rather than the market’s overvaluation. If the Fed raises rates, cash and bonds suddenly look much more attractive, and the TINA justification for buying extraordinarily expensive stocks is undermined.\n“You’ve got lots of volatility within the market but not a lot of volatility of the market,” says Robert Buckland, chief global equity strategist at Citigroup. “If there’s an alternative to just owning the index that could change.”\nThis month’s Fed scare showed just how sensitive stock prices are when it turns out there is an alternative to stocks, of sorts. The Fedraised rates fractionally off the floorby offering 0.05% instead of 0% on its cash-absorbing reverse repurchase agreements, a kind of overnight secured deposit, and instantly sucked in $235 billion extra. Talk of rate increases coming in two years instead of the three previously projected added to pressure on stocks, and the S&P fell just over 2% in three days before resuming its upward climb.\nIf that was the reaction to the Fed just barely doing something close to nothing, imagine how scared the market would be if the Fed started a normal rate hiking cycle and made cash attractive again. It isn’t something I think is likely soon, but the number one threat that could bring the turmoil from the depths to the surface of this market is the Fed.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"likeStatus":false,"favoriteStatus":false,"reportStatus":false,"tweetType":1,"langContent":"EN"},{"id":127216599,"gmtCreate":1624850653511,"gmtModify":1703846180244,"author":{"id":"3578545886341911","authorId":"3578545886341911","name":"Johnlimwt","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/a1adeee2347b67dfd778339494a5fd26","vip":1,"crmLevel":2,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"idStr":"3578545886341911","authorIdStr":"3578545886341911"},"htmlText":"Like please and thanks","listText":"Like please and thanks","text":"Like please and thanks","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":2,"commentSize":1,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/127216599","repostId":1177492181,"repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1177492181","kind":"news","pubTimestamp":1624849703,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/1177492181?lang=&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2021-06-28 11:08","market":"us","language":"en","title":"The Stock Market Hasn’t Been This Placid in Years","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1177492181","media":"WSJ","summary":"The U.S. stock marketis as calm as can beon the surface, while churning underneath more than it has ","content":"<p>The U.S. stock marketis as calm as can beon the surface, while churning underneath more than it has in decades.</p>\n<p>The S&amp;P 500 is so quiet it is almost disconcerting. The index hasn’t had a 5% correction based on closing prices since the end of October; no wonder the new day traders who started buying shares in lockdown think the market only goes up. The last time the S&amp;P was this serene for so long was in 2017, a period of calm that ended with the volatility crash early in 2018—although back then it was even quieter for much longer.</p>\n<p>Yet, look at the performance of types of stocks, and they have been swinging around much more than they usually do. Investors have been switching their bets between industries at a pace not seen outside of crises; March brought the biggest gap between the best and worst-performing sectors since 2002.</p>\n<p>The link between moves in growth stocks and cheap “value” stocks is the weakest—measured by the correlation—since 1995; investors are using them as proxies for betting for or against economic recovery.</p>\n<p>Meanwhile, big and small stocks last moved so independently of each other during the dot-com bubble of 2000, never a reassuring sign.</p>\n<p>I think this is another aspect of TINA: There Is No Alternative to stocks. With Treasurys, corporate bonds and cashoffering meager or zero return, stocks offer the best hope of gains. Investors who would previously have shifted money from stocks to bonds or vice versa now just switch from one sort of stock to another—so falls in one are offset by gains in another.</p>\n<p>There is no guarantee that it continues this way, of course. Bring enough fear into play and investors will bolt for the exits no matter how low cash yields are, just as they did in March last year. But while times seem pretty good, it is hard to justify buying a long-dated bond yielding far less than inflation. And times do seem pretty good.</p>\n<p>A widespread theory among those of a cautious disposition is that stocks just keep going up because a massive bubble has been inflated by cheap money and government stimulus. Stocks haven’t been so expensive since 2000, while a bubble mentality is obvious in the wild overtrading of fashionable stocks. A cluster of small stocks popular with retail tradershas often featured at the topof the most-traded lists this year, notablyGameStopandAMC Entertainmentbut also favorites such as Virgin Galactic andBlackBerry.</p>\n<p>It is undeniable that stocks are far more expensive than usual. But bubbles usually involve lots of volatility as they inflate, not a calm exterior and turmoil within, because every little price drop is magnified by others fearful that the bubble is about to pop. In 1999 there were at least nine drops of more than 5% in the S&amp;P 500, and from its intraday peak in July to the October low it fell 13%.</p>\n<p>This time the most obvious threat to stocks is the Federal Reserve, rather than the market’s overvaluation. If the Fed raises rates, cash and bonds suddenly look much more attractive, and the TINA justification for buying extraordinarily expensive stocks is undermined.</p>\n<p>“You’ve got lots of volatility within the market but not a lot of volatility of the market,” says Robert Buckland, chief global equity strategist at Citigroup. “If there’s an alternative to just owning the index that could change.”</p>\n<p>This month’s Fed scare showed just how sensitive stock prices are when it turns out there is an alternative to stocks, of sorts. The Fedraised rates fractionally off the floorby offering 0.05% instead of 0% on its cash-absorbing reverse repurchase agreements, a kind of overnight secured deposit, and instantly sucked in $235 billion extra. Talk of rate increases coming in two years instead of the three previously projected added to pressure on stocks, and the S&amp;P fell just over 2% in three days before resuming its upward climb.</p>\n<p>If that was the reaction to the Fed just barely doing something close to nothing, imagine how scared the market would be if the Fed started a normal rate hiking cycle and made cash attractive again. It isn’t something I think is likely soon, but the number one threat that could bring the turmoil from the depths to the surface of this market is the Fed.</p>","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>The Stock Market Hasn’t Been This Placid in Years</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 11px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;line-height: 11px;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nThe Stock Market Hasn’t Been This Placid in Years\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-06-28 11:08 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-stock-market-hasnt-been-this-placid-in-years-11624740199?mod=itp_wsj><strong>WSJ</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>The U.S. stock marketis as calm as can beon the surface, while churning underneath more than it has in decades.\nThe S&P 500 is so quiet it is almost disconcerting. The index hasn’t had a 5% correction...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-stock-market-hasnt-been-this-placid-in-years-11624740199?mod=itp_wsj\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{".DJI":"道琼斯"},"source_url":"https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-stock-market-hasnt-been-this-placid-in-years-11624740199?mod=itp_wsj","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1177492181","content_text":"The U.S. stock marketis as calm as can beon the surface, while churning underneath more than it has in decades.\nThe S&P 500 is so quiet it is almost disconcerting. The index hasn’t had a 5% correction based on closing prices since the end of October; no wonder the new day traders who started buying shares in lockdown think the market only goes up. The last time the S&P was this serene for so long was in 2017, a period of calm that ended with the volatility crash early in 2018—although back then it was even quieter for much longer.\nYet, look at the performance of types of stocks, and they have been swinging around much more than they usually do. Investors have been switching their bets between industries at a pace not seen outside of crises; March brought the biggest gap between the best and worst-performing sectors since 2002.\nThe link between moves in growth stocks and cheap “value” stocks is the weakest—measured by the correlation—since 1995; investors are using them as proxies for betting for or against economic recovery.\nMeanwhile, big and small stocks last moved so independently of each other during the dot-com bubble of 2000, never a reassuring sign.\nI think this is another aspect of TINA: There Is No Alternative to stocks. With Treasurys, corporate bonds and cashoffering meager or zero return, stocks offer the best hope of gains. Investors who would previously have shifted money from stocks to bonds or vice versa now just switch from one sort of stock to another—so falls in one are offset by gains in another.\nThere is no guarantee that it continues this way, of course. Bring enough fear into play and investors will bolt for the exits no matter how low cash yields are, just as they did in March last year. But while times seem pretty good, it is hard to justify buying a long-dated bond yielding far less than inflation. And times do seem pretty good.\nA widespread theory among those of a cautious disposition is that stocks just keep going up because a massive bubble has been inflated by cheap money and government stimulus. Stocks haven’t been so expensive since 2000, while a bubble mentality is obvious in the wild overtrading of fashionable stocks. A cluster of small stocks popular with retail tradershas often featured at the topof the most-traded lists this year, notablyGameStopandAMC Entertainmentbut also favorites such as Virgin Galactic andBlackBerry.\nIt is undeniable that stocks are far more expensive than usual. But bubbles usually involve lots of volatility as they inflate, not a calm exterior and turmoil within, because every little price drop is magnified by others fearful that the bubble is about to pop. In 1999 there were at least nine drops of more than 5% in the S&P 500, and from its intraday peak in July to the October low it fell 13%.\nThis time the most obvious threat to stocks is the Federal Reserve, rather than the market’s overvaluation. If the Fed raises rates, cash and bonds suddenly look much more attractive, and the TINA justification for buying extraordinarily expensive stocks is undermined.\n“You’ve got lots of volatility within the market but not a lot of volatility of the market,” says Robert Buckland, chief global equity strategist at Citigroup. “If there’s an alternative to just owning the index that could change.”\nThis month’s Fed scare showed just how sensitive stock prices are when it turns out there is an alternative to stocks, of sorts. The Fedraised rates fractionally off the floorby offering 0.05% instead of 0% on its cash-absorbing reverse repurchase agreements, a kind of overnight secured deposit, and instantly sucked in $235 billion extra. Talk of rate increases coming in two years instead of the three previously projected added to pressure on stocks, and the S&P fell just over 2% in three days before resuming its upward climb.\nIf that was the reaction to the Fed just barely doing something close to nothing, imagine how scared the market would be if the Fed started a normal rate hiking cycle and made cash attractive again. It isn’t something I think is likely soon, but the number one threat that could bring the turmoil from the depths to the surface of this market is the Fed.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"likeStatus":false,"favoriteStatus":false,"reportStatus":false,"tweetType":1,"comments":[{"id":5048736,"gmtCreate":1624857053282,"gmtModify":1663230179337,"authorId":3573721781255613,"author":{"id":3573721781255613,"idStr":"3573721781255613","authorId":3573721781255613,"name":"szueyann","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/cba9c6b1e785a9cf7301a7e6a2ff2354","vip":1,"crmLevel":2,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"individualDisplayBadges":[]},"repliedAuthorId":0,"objectId":127216599,"type":1,"supId":0,"prevId":0,"content":"<u>ok</u>","text":"<u>ok</u>","html":"<u>ok</u>"}],"langContent":"EN"}],"hasMoreComments":true,"newsSizeData":{"likeSize":128,"commentSize":27,"repostSize":0,"favoriteSize":0,"likeStatus":false,"favoriteStatus":false}}