Shifts in our ETFG Behavioral Quant scores have long been a favorite topic of our Monday morning posts for a number of reasons but largely because price momentum is one of the key contributors to the overall score and provides a glimpse into the shifting dynamics underlying the market. In business school you may have been taught that stock prices follow a “random walk” and that there’s no benefit to studying past prices. It’s probably an open secret that nearly every investment professional does just that on a daily basis and that markets aren’t nearly as “efficient” as many in academia would like to believe. College professors might be reduced to calling those generational explosions of tech stocks, of which the dot.com boom of the late 90’s was just the most recent example, just another case of “animal spirits” but that’s precisely why we so often turn to our ETFG Behavioral Scores to help shed light on how investors are reacting to market developments. Last March, the Quant movers report helped identify that bank funds were beginning to see positive momentum (and subsequently outperformance), as the chatter about a potential Fed rate hike began to increase. But when those same funds dominated our list of behavioral top scorers late last Fall, it became clear the move into bank funds was overextended.
Perhaps that’s what makes the current “schizophrenic” nature of the list so maddening as not only is there no clear trend or pattern, but the list is made of funds that seem diametrically opposed to each other. The top behavioral 25 list seems to have nearly as many China and small-cap funds as it does utility and consumer staples products while the list of weekly quant movers is dominated by European and developed market equity funds including the iShares Europe ETF (IEV), Vanguard FTSE Europe (VGK) and the Vanguard FTSE Developed Markets ETF (VEA) despite the fact that all three of these funds closed just off their weekly lows at prices not seen since 2013!
This isn’t the first time the list has become so bifurcated and one reason why is that price momentum is just part of the overall behavioral scoring process, the other part falls under the headline of “sentiment” and includes implied volatility, short interest and the put call ratio, all of which you can review in the ETFG Quant Report. It certainly isn’t price momentum that put those European oriented funds on that list as all three have composite technical scores close to their bottom decile. Instead it was their sentiment scores, typically high implied volatility or short-interest, as IEV has crossed into a bear market since its peak last May while VGK and VEA are both just outside bear market territory and it’s a similar story for the China funds such as KraneShares CSI China Internet ETF (KWEB) and the Deutsche X-trackers Harvest CSI 500 China-A Shares Small Cap ETF (ASHS). That high volatility and short interest can weigh down a fund during bad times…or lead to explosive outperformance when investors suddenly decide to embrace risk.
The other part of the list, made up of consumer staples and utility names, consists of funds whose strong price momentum can override the weak sentiment scores common to their asset class. It’s been nothing but wine and roses for the utilities sector since last December with the Utilities Select Sector SPDR (XLU) up 3.27% since December 5th versus a 10% loss for the S&P 500. In fact, if you re-ranked the Quant Report on either short or intermediate term momentum, nearly every utilities fund we score makes the top 20 although only two small funds have pushed their way into the Behavioral Top 25, the PowerShares DWA Utilities Momentum Portfolio (PUI) and the PowerShares S&P SmallCap Utilities Portfolio (PSCU). Readers only taking a quick glance at our lists might conclude that the momentum shift for utilities is still in its early stages and decide to go all in just as the sector, like the rest of the broad equity market, was hit hard on Friday with XLU down .9% while funds with a smaller-cap focus, like the Guggenheim S&P 500 Equal Weight Utilities Fund (RYU), were down substantially more on the day and closed the week in the red. In fact, XLU has the highest momentum score of any of the select sector SPDR funds but also has the lowest sentiment score thanks to its incredibly low short interest and tepid volatility which is why only small funds with a smaller average market cap weighting make the behavioral top 25 and perhaps not for much longer. PUI was down over 2.7% last Friday on heavy volume several times that experienced on a normal trade day.
So where does that leave investors, besides between a rock and a hard place? The ETFG Quant Report was designed with flexibility in mind so remember that you can manipulate the columns to find funds with low volatility and momentum scores not currently tracking new lows. Preferred stock and a number of long/short and market neutral funds meet these criteria where the more adventurous might try the opposite tack of high volatility and come away with a list of MLP and China funds that could rally if the markets stabilize or investors become more discriminating in their selling. But with a number of technical indicators like the Arms Index telling traders that equities might not be oversold just yet, staying cautious might be the smartest strategy.
Thank you for reading ETF Global Perspectives!
Assumptions, opinions and estimates constitute our judgment as of the date of this material and are subject to change without notice. ETF Global LLC (“ETFG”) and its affiliates and any third-party providers, as well as their directors, officers, shareholders, employees or agents (collectively ETFG Parties) do not guarantee the accuracy, completeness, adequacy or timeliness of any information, including ratings and rankings and are not responsible for errors and omissions or for the results obtained from the use of such information and ETFG Parties shall have no liability for any errors, omissions, or interruptions therein, regardless of the cause, or for the results obtained from the use of such information. ETFG PARTIES DISCLAIM ANY AND ALL EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO ANY WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY, SUITABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE OR USE. In no event shall ETFG Parties be liable to any party for any direct, indirect, incidental, exemplary, compensatory, punitive, special or consequential damages, costs, expenses, legal fees, or losses (including, without limitation, lost income or lost profits and opportunity costs) in connection with any use of the information contained in this document even if advised of the possibility of such damages.
ETFG ratings and rankings are statements of opinion as of the date they are expressed and not statements of fact or recommendations to purchase, hold, or sell any securities or to make any investment decisions. ETFG ratings and rankings should not be relied on when making any investment or other business decision. ETFG’s opinions and analyses do not address the suitability of any security. ETFG does not act as a fiduciary or an investment advisor. While ETFG has obtained information from sources they believe to be reliable, ETFG does not perform an audit or undertake any duty of due diligence or independent verification of any information it receives.
This material is not intended as an offer or solicitation for the purchase or sale of any security or other financial instrument. Securities, financial instruments or strategies mentioned herein may not be suitable for all investors. Any opinions expressed herein are given in good faith, are subject to change without notice, and are only correct as of the stated date of their issue. Prices, values, or income from any securities or investments mentioned in this report may fall against the interests of the investor and the investor may get back less than the amount invested. Where an investment is described as being likely to yield income, please note that the amount of income that the investor will receive from such an investment may fluctuate. Where an investment or security is denominated in a different currency to the investor's currency of reference, changes in rates of exchange may have an adverse effect on the value, price or income of or from that investment to the investor.