Oversold, due for a bounce

I wasn't sure if you were aware, you seem only to put Mets wins in the books.

Sorry no, I don't like to jinx Mets losing streaks by bringing attetion to them.

The furious reversal rally in the stock market has the S&P 500 carving out a rare technical formation called "The Bollinger Bands Are Drunk..."

Sure, here and there

Subway ads playing off the latest NYC affordability crisis...

of course

Stay tuned. It's kind of a fake move.

Right. Those value PMs in 2000 were basically forced by their mandates and rigid style-box dynamics to shun tech. Discipline was imposed upon them.

Sure. But I'd argue that matters less now than it would have at any prior time in decades. BRK hasn't done much strategically in years. Yes, market seems more reluctant to pay up for the optionality of management having $400B in dry powder with him gone, but unclear this is the key swing factor.

Funny, at Barron's from '97-'12, it was three years of headlong mania followed by three years' nasty retrenchent and then a decade of talking to value PMs who invariably bragged "we owned no tech in 2000." Unthinkable to people relatively new to the market to be able to boast of that in a few years.

RIght, I'd argue the difference is one of magnitude. In 2000 the stock was making multi-year relative lows.

As you say, the 12-month trailing frame penalizes BRK given the ramp into last year's annual meeting.

The stock relative to the S&P 500 looks a bit different. The massive dump vs. the market leading to the March 2000 peak was the culmination of two years when "anti-quality" ripped vs. quality.

Go ahead and ridicule, get it out of your system. Just standard bull-market stuff, shell companies reborn as plays on a current craze.

Such mini-manias do more to funnel mindless speculative flow away from the core of the market - where it could do more damage - than to stoke dangerous imbalances.

There's a gap just above 900 from mid-2009. I could go on. It's really not the case.

Which says nothing about whether this particular gap will be filled, of course.

It's absolutely not true that there are no unfilled gaps. More than half maybe but not nearly all. There are upside gaps from last April/May that remain unfilled.

“This never happened. It will shock you how much it never happened.”

Was there upside risk yesterday or not?

bsky.app/profile/pale...

The credit agencies are easy targets, but still...

Mechanical corporate 401k-match contributions a big part of that. I'm talking active retail traders. (And she goes by Liz Ann.)

(The chart shows net flows into/out of equities)

Another bit of data supporting the idea that retail traders are as susceptible as ever to human nature and crowd psychology. According to Citadel, retail players turned heavy net sellers last week, perhaps suggesting near-term capitulation. They bought the the highs hand over fist in late January.

Not saying this rally should be trusted, but there's a scenario where we look back to the Friday/Monday selloff combo and last night's futures dump as a surrender byTACO believers.

Still pretty mild in terms of overall market repricing, but that would only mean the rebound won't be very powerful.

That moment is only really evident in retrospect.

It's a season of the year when people of several religious traditions are ritually reciting ancient articles of faith, such as "Markets panic until policy makers panic..."

I'm all for pedantic policing of word usage but this is fine. The contents of the filing are confidential.

Safe to assume. He's on BlueSky, X and LinkedIn.

They were selling since the highs, came into the year with heavy short exposure. Retail frozen until fleeing after market down 7%.

As I've said for a couple years, a broader market isn't a safer or more rewarding one. But FWIW, the many continue to hold up better than the few.

Equal-weighted S&P 500 back to a relative high vs. the market-cap-weighted version, outperforming by more than eight percentage points over five months.