Robert Shiller's Cyclically Adjusted Price Earning Ratio as a Long Term Timing Indicator

 (Correction: this article is corrected version from the previous one published on 10/23/2009. In the previous artilce, we used nominal PE10 instead of real PE 10, that resulted in higher PE10 ratio, which is incorrect).
Yale Professor Robert Shiller has devised and maintained a so called "Cyclically Adjusted Price Earning Ratio" (CAPE10) as an alternative to the popular PE ratio to value the US stock market. CAPE10 is defined as the ratio of price to the average of last 10 year trailing S&P 500 annual earnings. In his now famous book titled as "Irrational Exuberance", Shiller popularized this ratio as a long term stock market valuation metric.  As it stands on last Friday October 30, 2009, the current CAPE10 is 18.88 while the long term average CAPE10 (since year 1881) is 16.38. This implies that the current US stock market is 16% over valued.

It is interesting to examine how effective using such a metric as a long term stock market timing indicator. Similar to the Warren Buffett's stock market metric, ValidFi implements and maintains a live strategy called Shiller Cyclically Adjusted PE 10 Stock Market Timing Strategy. One of its model portfolios buys stocks only when this ratio is deemed to be significantly under valued (the current CAPE10 is 33% lower than the long term CAPE10 average) and goes into cash when such as ratio signals significant over valued (if the current CAPE10 is 50% higher than its long term average). The stock market exposure is through buying Wilshire 5000 total return index (^DWC).

From 12/31/1970 to 11/2/2009, the weekly adjusted portfolio achieves 6.8% annualized return and standard deviation 11.9% compared with Wilshire 5000 total return's annualized return 6.77% and standard deviation 19.5%.  Such a portfolio was in cash from 5/12/1995 all the way to 2/20/2009! See the following chart:

It is hard to believe that an average investor would have such patience to stay out of the stock market for such a long time, especially during the bull markets. However, a prudent investor would utilize such an indicator to carefully manage the risk during over valued periods.

Some readers might ask that since Shiller's indicator is a long term indicator, what strategies one could use during the long time periods when it is out of stock market. We will have follow up articles on how to combine such a long term indicator and some safe strategies to achieve safe and more reasonable returns.

Interested readers could find the up to date information of both Shiller and Buffett indicators on ValidFi's 360 Degree Market View page.

Halloween Indicators Issue Buy Signals: Now What?

Mark Hulbert recently published a story on marketwatch.com: Hybrid Halloween Indicators. The original Halloween indicator (or sometimes called "sell in May and go away") has been studied extensively. In his story, Hulbert mentioned a research paper published in 2002 in his article. The paper found that most stock markets around the globe indeed exhibited such abnormality: "sell in  early May and buy in late October" could achieve excessive risk adjusted return.
The improved strategy proposed by Sy Harding (detailed description could be found here and here) issued a buy signal on Friday Oct. 16, 2009. This strategy uses MACD to further pinpoint the buy/sell dates around April and October time frames. It is pertinent to compare such a strategy with the original strategy as well as with the buy and hold strategy at this time.
The "original" strategy dictates that one sell on April 26th and buy on October 16th. The following table compared the performance of the three strategies from 7/1/1971 to 10/16/2009. All of them use Wilshire 5000 total return index as the proxy to the stock market investment and use 13 week treasury bill as the cash when they are out of the stock market.

	Since 1971	Last 5 Years	Last 3 Years	Last 1 Year
AR (%) Original	7.769	2.544	-1.938	-7.138
AR (%) Improved	8.236	2.696	1.364	3.777
AR (%) Wilshire 5000	6.733	0.693	-6.55	17.488
Sharpe (%) Original	28.915	3.211	-15.331	-20.388
Sharpe (%) Improved	38.481	5.097	-1.172	14.826
Sharpe (%) Wilshire 5000	16.064	-5.257	-27.383	45.033
Max. Drawdown (%) Original	35.107	35.107	35.107	32.114
Max. Drawdown (%) Improved	33.073	33.073	33.073	27.306
Max. Drawdown (%) Wilshire 5000	56.645	56.645	56.645	32.13

From the table, one could see that the "improved" strategy does the best in terms of overall return and risk. Overall, one could clearly see that both "original" and "improved" strategies have outperformed the buy and hold strategy.



From the above graph, we could see that the "improved" strategy waited till the end of 2008 to get into the stock market, thus sidestepping some loss that the "original" strategy incurred during the October to December time frame. Unfortunately, both of them suffered a great deal from the March steep decline.  This is a clear reminder that such strategies are not fool proof and they are still subject to stock market's big swing.
Given the steep run-up of the stock market so far, a favorable seasonality backdrop should be treated just as a backdrop: one should not blindly follow the strategy alone but instead, taking such a statistical evidence into consideration during your portfolio management such as portfolio rebalancing.

Even In Slow Boring Fixed Income Investing, Hot Hands Are Still Hot

Momentum effect, i.e. a phenomenon that past 'hot' funds or assets will continue to be 'hot' in a certain future period, has been widely recognized as a market inefficiency, both by practitioners and academic researchers. Momentum based  strategies have been proposed in equity (stocks), commodities and asset allocation investing (see our previous article for more information).

Less well known is that momentum effect exists even in boring and slowly moving fixed income (bonds) markets.  In a recent research paper titled 'Hot Hands' in Bond Funds by Derwall, Jeroen and Huij, Joop, it is shown that investing based on past performance momentum in bond funds could earn statistically significant returns. In practice, FundX's Janet Brown has a long running investment newsletter on a technique called 'Upgrading'. One of its model portfolios is based on selecting bond funds based on a momentum score. Utilizing such a method, FundX now manages a mutual fund FundX Flexible Income (INCMX).

ValidFi maintains various types of bond fund momentum based strategies. One model portfolio selects a bond fund monthly or quarterly among a list of funds whose managers have won Morningstar's fixed income manager of the year award since 7//30/2000. In the past 9 years, both monthly and quarterly based portfolios have achieved more than 10% annualized return. The following table compares the two portfolios performance (from 7/30/2000 to 10/10/2009):

	Up To Date	Last 5 Years	Last 3 Years	Last 1 Years
AR(%) (monthly portfolio)	11.46	9.806	10.462	23.226
AR(%) (quarterly portfolio)	10.926	9.828	10.499	20.67
Sharpe Ratio(%) (monthly portfolio)	206.991	159.332	175.41	478.605
Sharpe Ratio(%) (quarterly portfolio)	191.389	157.406	172.05	399.162
Standard Deviation(%) (monthly portfolio)	4.681	4.925	5.054	4.827
Standard Deviation(%) (quarterly portfolio)	4.784	4.784	5.174	5.147
Max. Draw Down(%) (monthly portfolio)	7.437	5.4	5.4	3.419
Max. Draw Down(%) (quarterly portfolio)	7.437	7.437	5.4	3.419

Compared with one of the best bond funds, Pimco's Total Return Fund PTTRX (managed by Bill Gross who won Morningstar's manager of the year award in 1998, 2000 and 2007), both monthly and quarterly adjusted portfolios outperform it. The following chart shows the comparison between PTTRX and the quarterly adjusted portfolio.



At the moment, both portfolios pick Loomis Sayles Bond Instl (LSBDX) as their investment.

In addition to actively managed bond mutual fund momentum, the index bond ETFs or mutual funds  also exhibit good momentum. We will have more follow up articles to detail these investing strategies.

PIMCO's Global Multi-Asset Fund PGMAX Reduced Equity Exposure Recently

Recent Barron's article: seeking safe returns in a perilous world revealed PIMCO's  newly introduced global multi-asset fund PGMAX and their asset allocation guidelines: based on risk factor allocation instead of traditional asset pigeonholes.

It is interesting to see that ValidFi's Realtime Asset Allocation tool revealed that PGMAX recently reduced its equity exposure (click to enlarge the chart): 

Gurus' Asset Allocation in the Recent Market Whipsaw

Entering October, one saw the markets trembled a little bit. It's time to review several well known asset allocators' positions.
Top performing asset allocation fund Leuthold Core Investment LCORX (19.4% YTD return up to 10/2/2009) made a noticeable reduction in its equity exposure: from almost 100%  to 71%. That is quite significant, even if one takes the recent market drop into consideration. See the following chart:



The other top performing fund Janus Balanced (JABAX) (17.1% YTD return up to 10/2/2009) has been steady after some equity reduction at the end of September: its equity exposure has been around 50%. See the following chart:



Waddell & Reed Asset Strategy Y (WYASX) (17% YTD return up to 10/2/2009) has increased its international equity exposure significantly since early September:



The above is derived from ValidFi's innovative Realtime Asset Allocation (RAA) analysis tool. The actual percentage of allocation might not be that accurate. However, the tool is doing a reasonable job to identify the allocation trend and its change. For the equity exposures mentioned above, we would like to clarify that they represent an estimated Beta correlation with the equity index (represented by Vanguard Total Stock Market Index VTSMX). It does not represent the actual asset allocation but instead  represents how close the asset (equity) portion is related to the stock market index VTSMX. For example, a fund could have a 100% Beta on the equity portion but its actual equity allocation is 70%, that would mean that this fund's equity portion's beta is 1.4  (100%/70%).

The takeaway from the above is that we are in a period of uncertainty. In such a period, it is crucial to be consistent with strategies you are using and position your portfolio accordingly.