Commentary

Fisher Investments Editorial Staff
Politics, The Global View

Your Best Hedge Against Beltway Theatrics

By, 05/23/2017

At the risk of stating the obvious, things have been rather eventful in Washington, DC the last couple weeks, and stock market volatility has accompanied the theatrics. The S&P 500 suffered its worst day in months on Tuesday and even with a late-week comeback, it inched downward for the second week in a row. As we wrote a few days ago, political scandals aren’t inherently bearish, nor are heads of states’ impeachments or resignation (not that we believe either is likely, as we also explained). However, if you’re worried about the goings on, that is not a reason to exit stocks. Rather, your best hedge against all the leaks, innuendo and rumors in DC is a global portfolio.

Global investing’s biggest benefit is diversification—including diversification against political risk in any one country. Case in point: While US stocks dipped a bit recently, non-US stocks rose. Non-US stocks are handily beating the US year to date, and their lead widened as America’s political theatrics heated up. As we type, their year-to-date return is nearly double the S&P 500’s.

Exhibit 1: To Hedge Against US Political Risk, Invest Globally

Commentary

Austin Fraser
Emerging Markets

Brazil’s Temer Gets Hosed in Car Wash

By, 05/19/2017

In a re-run of events from last year, it seems a Brazilian president faces corruption charges that will likely put an end to their presidency. Indeed, a year after the Senate opened impeachment proceedings against former President Dilma Rousseff, it is now current President Michel Temer’s turn to go through the “Car Wash”—the name of Brazil’s huge corruption scandal that has ensnared many politicians and business executives. Brazilian markets plunged on the news as Temer’s chances of advancing necessary reform now look less likely. For investors, this is a keen reminder of how fleeting sentiment-driven rallies can be—particularly when other fundamental drivers are weak.      

On Wednesday, Brazilian newspaper O Globo broke news that Temer was secretly recorded endorsing a bribe. The story claims Joesley Batista, executive of the meatpacking[i] company JBS, reached a plea deal with Car Wash investigators two months ago, providing a list of the bribes paid to politicians over 10 years and agreeing to wear a wiretap to incriminate politicians. On March 7, he met with Temer and Batista admitted to paying a monthly “allowance” to former Lower House Speaker Eduardo Cunha in exchange for Cunha’s silence on other politicians potentially involved. Temer indicated he knew of the payments and essentially authorized the bribe, which was reportedly 5 million reais (~$1.5 million). Separately, JBS executives also recorded PSDB party president, former presidential candidate and senator Aécio Neves demanding 2 million reais in bribes to pay his legal bills. The police tagged the money, following it from JBS’s facilities in São Paulo to Neves’s representatives.

At this point, the Supreme Court removed Neves from office and could eventually issue an arrest warrant (although they denied one request to do so Thursday). Several Congress members, including some from Temer’s support base, asked for the president’s resignation. Opposition representatives also filed an impeachment request in the House on charges of obstruction of justice. Temer, for his part, denied the contents of the news reports. Although it is possible Temer refutes the charges, his presidency is seriously threatened if tapes surface. With that, there are two scenarios: 1) Temer resigns; or 2) he continues to deny wrongdoing while the legislature brings impeachment proceedings.

Commentary

Fisher Investments Editorial Staff
Across the Atlantic

Your Last Investing Lesson From France’s Election

By, 05/17/2017
Ratings584.293103

On May 7, French voters went to the polls and turned away an allegedly existential threat to global markets in anti-euro candidate Marine Le Pen, electing independent centrist Emmanuel Macron instead. With catastrophe supposedly averted, French stocks … fell? Why the lackluster response? The answer: Markets didn’t wait for French polls to close before pricing in the likely outcome, bypassing investors awaiting the certainty of a final result. Let this be a lesson: Waiting for full clarity is costly.

In the run-up to the French vote’s first round, markets were skittish. Among 11 initial candidates, 4 had a shot at advancing to round two: Marine Le Pen, Jean-Luc Mélenchon, François Fillon and Emmanuel Macron. The latter two were relatively centrist and pro-euro, but the far-right Le Pen and far-left Mélenchon had no love for Brussels. Polls showed Fillon and Macron trouncing Le Pen—the polling leader—in a hypothetical round two, but folks worried they wouldn’t have the chance when Mélenchon made a late polling surge. Even though he trailed Fillon and Macron, investors remembered polls being wrong before Brexit, the US election and Britain’s 2015 election, and they feared an all anti-euro Le Pen vs. Mélenchon runoff.

But on April 23, as polls predicted, the race narrowed to Le Pen versus Macron, the former Economy Minister who started his own political party, En Marche. Given Macron’s 20 percentage point advantage—well beyond most margins for error—the runoff outcome was never in much doubt. French markets surged, correctly anticipating Macron’s victory—and by the time the results were tallied, they had moved on, actually dropping in the days following the second vote. It was a classic “buy the rumor, sell the news” scenario.

Commentary

John Hulcher
Corporate Earnings, MarketMinder Minute

Market Insights: Earnings Growth

By, 05/17/2017
Ratings513.872549

In this Market Insights video, Group Vice President of Global Portfolio Evaluation John Hulcher discusses earnings growth and what it means for stocks moving forward. Oil prices depressed headline earnings starting in mid-2015, causing a so-called earnings recession. However, Energy’s drag has become a tailwind and analysts forecast earnings accelerating throughout 2017.

Research Analysis

Fisher Investments Editorial Staff
Into Perspective

Market Insights Podcast: Market Update - May 2017

By, 05/15/2017
Ratings543.925926

In this podcast, we talk to US Private Client Services Vice President Erik Renaud about some recent client questions on the market and our current outlook. Topics include all-time market highs, Trump Administration tax and trade policy, European elections and bear market causes. We also discuss some of the economic fundamentals supporting Fisher Investments’ bullish outlook.

Commentary

Fisher Investments Editorial Staff
Emerging Markets, Politics

A Korean Soap Opera Comes to an End

By, 05/15/2017
Ratings114.090909

Move aside, France—you aren’t the only country with a new president! Last Tuesday, South Korean voters chose Moon Jae-in of the center-left Democratic Party (Minjoo Party) to replace the recently ousted Park Geun-hye. As observers speculate on the implications, from domestic issues like chaebol reform to renewing relations with its neighbors to the north, the immediate impact for markets is falling uncertainty. This is the latest example in a fully global trend.

Moon’s win caps a turbulent stretch in Korean politics. A shocking[i] influence peddling scandal involving one of Park’s personal associates and a Rasputin-like figure led to the now-former president’s impeachment last December—which Korea’s Constitutional Court upheld in March. Three candidates emerged to replace Park: Moon, software entrepreneur Ahn Cheol-soo of the centrist People’s Party and Hong Jun-pyo of Park’s conservative Liberty Korea Party. However, ideology wasn’t the dominant issue this election. Rather, many pundits saw this race as an indictment of the status quo, exemplified by Park and the corrupt political culture she represented. Polls had Moon as the favorite since early April, so his winning with 41% of the vote wasn’t shocking. Hong did surprise though, finishing second at 24%, while Ahn—who enjoyed some brief bursts of popularity—fell to third at 21%. With Moon now in power and promising big changes, what can investors expect?

While Moon made standard campaign pledges—e.g., creating new jobs—gridlock will make it difficult for him to make any big, sweeping changes. For one, Moon won the lowest share of the vote of any Korean president since 1987, indicating the election was more anti status-quo than pro-Moon—perhaps limiting his mandate and political capital. More importantly, the Democratic Party holds only 120 of 300 seats (40%) in the National Assembly. Even with total support from the People’s Party, a center-left coalition would only manage about 53%: short of the 60% super-majority required to pass any non-budget bills. The opposition could block legislation, promoting gridlock.

Commentary

Elisabeth Dellinger
Reality Check

The Indexing Fad

By, 05/15/2017
Ratings604.008333

Last Friday, Bloomberg published a rather astounding development: There are now more “market indexes” in existence than there are US stocks.

Now, their data are proprietary and not described in detail, so it isn’t totally clear what they’re counting as indexes here. For instance, there are oodles of sector indexes that are subsets of broader indexes like the S&P 500—are they included? Also, it isn’t clear whether we’re talking US-only or global, stock-only or bonds/REITs/other securities, or other finer details. But, considering over half of these indexes were born since 2012—and all those sector-level indexes are more mature than that—it seems fair to say a good chunk of these indexes are what the industry calls “smart beta.” Bloomberg suggests as much:

What drove the jump?

Commentary

Fisher Investments Editorial Staff
Corporate Earnings

Earnings Demise Greatly Exaggerated

By, 05/15/2017
Ratings214.214286

Reports of earnings’ downturn in 2015 – 2016 were an exaggeration, as Mark Twain might say. Now, with S&P 500 profits rebounding sharply, pundits seem to celebrate this as though it’s a rebirth. But earnings’ underlying trend overall rose at a fine clip pretty much the whole time. Investors’ sunnier reaction to recent data says a lot more about sentiment than Corporate America’s health.

After posting declines through 2015 and 2016’s first half, S&P 500 earnings flipped positive and eked out an annual 0.7% gain last year.[i] During this period of weak profit growth pundits dubbed an “earnings recession,” many investors wondered: Why be bullish? After all, for stocks, fundamentals are an important input into market direction, and you can’t get much more fundamental than profits! Now, mere months later, profits are jumping and folks are relieved. Yet the reality is the recent rise isn’t a renaissance. It’s all about math and one sector—Energy’s profit-growth math.

2015 and 2016’s earnings decline was almost entirely due to Energy’s sagging profits. After a roughly 20-month oil price plunge from $110 per barrel in June 2014 to $26 in January 2016, Energy sector profits imploded.[ii] Oil prices’ -77% drop had a sufficiently powerful influence on Energy firms’ profits—which are very oil-price sensitive—to flip headline profits negative. (Exhibit 1) Investors who correctly saw this was a single-sector phenomenon and rejected the “earnings recession” narrative were rewarded by stocks, which rose 14.7% while Energy skewed profits downward.[iii] (18.1% excluding Energy.[iv])

Research Analysis

Fisher Investments Editorial Staff
Into Perspective

Market Insights Podcast: A Re-Introduction to The Ten Roads to Riches

By, 05/11/2017
Ratings744.114865

In this podcast, we talk to Content Analyst Elisabeth Dellinger about the recently released second edition of The Ten Roads to Riches.

Commentary

Fisher Investments Editorial Staff
Into Perspective

Into Perspective: Markets and Impeachment

By, 05/11/2017
Ratings1623.614197

Photo by John Sorrell/iStockPhoto.

As a reminder, our political analysis is nonpartisan and focuses exclusively on political developments’ potential market impact (or lack thereof). We favor no party, politician or ideology and believe political biases lead to investing errors. For details on why we believe it’s important for investment advisers to help clients avoid acting on political biases during the course of their work, read Fisher Investments CEO Damian Ornani's InvestmentNews article.

Commentary

Elisabeth Dellinger
Reality Check

The Indexing Fad

By, 05/15/2017
Ratings604.008333

Last Friday, Bloomberg published a rather astounding development: There are now more “market indexes” in existence than there are US stocks.

Now, their data are proprietary and not described in detail, so it isn’t totally clear what they’re counting as indexes here. For instance, there are oodles of sector indexes that are subsets of broader indexes like the S&P 500—are they included? Also, it isn’t clear whether we’re talking US-only or global, stock-only or bonds/REITs/other securities, or other finer details. But, considering over half of these indexes were born since 2012—and all those sector-level indexes are more mature than that—it seems fair to say a good chunk of these indexes are what the industry calls “smart beta.” Bloomberg suggests as much:

What drove the jump?

Commentary

Fisher Investments Editorial Staff
Corporate Earnings

Earnings Demise Greatly Exaggerated

By, 05/15/2017
Ratings214.214286

Reports of earnings’ downturn in 2015 – 2016 were an exaggeration, as Mark Twain might say. Now, with S&P 500 profits rebounding sharply, pundits seem to celebrate this as though it’s a rebirth. But earnings’ underlying trend overall rose at a fine clip pretty much the whole time. Investors’ sunnier reaction to recent data says a lot more about sentiment than Corporate America’s health.

After posting declines through 2015 and 2016’s first half, S&P 500 earnings flipped positive and eked out an annual 0.7% gain last year.[i] During this period of weak profit growth pundits dubbed an “earnings recession,” many investors wondered: Why be bullish? After all, for stocks, fundamentals are an important input into market direction, and you can’t get much more fundamental than profits! Now, mere months later, profits are jumping and folks are relieved. Yet the reality is the recent rise isn’t a renaissance. It’s all about math and one sector—Energy’s profit-growth math.

2015 and 2016’s earnings decline was almost entirely due to Energy’s sagging profits. After a roughly 20-month oil price plunge from $110 per barrel in June 2014 to $26 in January 2016, Energy sector profits imploded.[ii] Oil prices’ -77% drop had a sufficiently powerful influence on Energy firms’ profits—which are very oil-price sensitive—to flip headline profits negative. (Exhibit 1) Investors who correctly saw this was a single-sector phenomenon and rejected the “earnings recession” narrative were rewarded by stocks, which rose 14.7% while Energy skewed profits downward.[iii] (18.1% excluding Energy.[iv])

Commentary

Fisher Investments Editorial Staff
Into Perspective

Into Perspective: Markets and Impeachment

By, 05/11/2017
Ratings1623.614197

Photo by John Sorrell/iStockPhoto.

As a reminder, our political analysis is nonpartisan and focuses exclusively on political developments’ potential market impact (or lack thereof). We favor no party, politician or ideology and believe political biases lead to investing errors. For details on why we believe it’s important for investment advisers to help clients avoid acting on political biases during the course of their work, read Fisher Investments CEO Damian Ornani's InvestmentNews article.

Commentary

Fisher Investments Editorial Staff
Developed Markets, Into Perspective

A Surprise From the Land of the Rising Sun?

By, 05/09/2017
Ratings433.895349

Four months into 2017, most eyes are fixated on the West—particularly European elections and the new US administration. However, it’s a big world, and it’s easy to overlook one of the globe’s biggest economies: Japan. The Land of the Rising Sun has struggled economically throughout the broader expansion, and many pundits are growing dour about Japan’s economy and stocks—particularly because of allegedly tense trade relations. While we agree Japan’s economy likely continues to struggle, sentiment is catching up with this weak reality. Stocks move most on the gap between sentiment and reality, and these lowered expectations increase the risk Japanese data and/or reform efforts positively surprise.  

A lackluster economy isn’t a new development: see Japan’s Lost Decade(s) for more. Since the current global expansion began, Japan suffered recessions in 2011, 2012 and 2014.[i] One-off events like the Great Tohoku Earthquake of 2011 played a role, but weak domestic demand has been the persistent issue. In late 2012, present Prime Minister Shinzo Abe took office and promised to revitalize the economy via his three-part “Abenomics” program: extraordinary monetary easing, fiscal stimulus and economic and structural reform. The first targeted long-running deflation, the second would kick start growth and the third aimed to liberalize the economy in the longer term.

Abenomics’ potential excited foreign observers and raised expectations—which also set up disappointment if the program fell short. Hence, Japanese stocks outperformed substantially right after Abe was elected. But this hasn’t lasted: Japan has overall underperformed developed world stocks since Abe took office December 26, 2012.

Commentary

Fisher Investments Editorial Staff
GDP, Investor Sentiment

The Eurozone Economy Needs a Better Publicist

By, 05/09/2017

Listen up, data fans! Q1 GDP for three of the world’s biggest economic players is out. From worst to first, the US grew 0.7% annualized, the UK 1.2% and the eurozone 1.8%.[i] By rights, it seems investors should cheer each in proportion to how much each country or region, you know … grew. But perceptions are fickle, and the UK received the least cheer. The eurozone garnered relatively more optimism, but no “fastest growing, woohoo” accolades. In America, pundits surely noticed the slowdown, but most headlines were happy to brush it off as a seasonal quirk. This is only the latest sign sentiment is sunnier toward US stocks than non-US, giving the latter a bigger wall of worry to climb. As reality overseas continues beating expectations, non-US stocks should do quite well.

Last week, Fisher Investments founder Ken Fisher held a fun Twitter poll, asking followers how many times the US grew faster than the UK and eurozone during the last 16 quarters. Over half of respondents said the US grew fastest at least 12 of 16 quarters. U-S-A! U-S-A! But the right answer, which received only 25% of the vote, was seven. Yes, in the last 16 quarters through Q1, the US was tops less than half the time.

Why the split between perception and reality? We can hazard a guess: Investors are inadvertently failing to compare like with like. The UK, eurozone and many other nations report quarter-over-quarter GDP growth—tally up all output in Q1, and calculate the percentage difference between that and Q4’s total output. (They also report year-over-year growth—the percentage difference between output in Q1 2017 and Q1 2016’s total.) But the US, Japan and a couple others report annualized GDP: tally up all Q1’s output, do a bunch of seasonal adjustments and then multiply by four to show what full-year GDP would be if that pace held.[ii] The percentage change between Q1 2017’s seasonally adjusted annualized GDP and Q4’s is the seasonally adjusted annualized growth rate

Commentary

Fisher Investments Editorial Staff
Taxes

Ken Fisher in USA Today

By, 05/09/2017
Ratings294.551724

Fisher Investments' founder and Executive Chairman Ken Fisher’s latest article, published in this morning’s USA Today, covers what is quietly the most important aspect of a potential Trump tax cut. Here is a highlight:

“People get hung up on details, such as corporate tax rates. But what matters most is defining property rights between government and citizens. That's what the tax code does. What does the government get? What do people get to keep? What do we get to do with what we keep? Where do we draw the line, and is that line bright and enduring? Having confidence that property rights won’t change enables businesses to make long-term capital expenditures — new plants, new research and development, new equipment, new software. If we drop the corporate tax rate to 15%, fine, but if everyone believes it will rise again in 2021 or 2025, we’ll get business transactions between now and then that help for the next four years but don’t change the world.”

Read the full article here.

Research Analysis

Scott Botterman
Into Perspective

2017: The Year of Falling European Political Uncertainty

By, 01/31/2017
Ratings724.159722

Falling uncertainty gave stocks a tailwind in 2016 as investors moved past the Brexit referendum and US presidential election. By year end, persistent skepticism gave way to budding optimism, and the proverbial “animal spirits” stirred. This year, it should be continental Europe’s turn. France, Germany and the Netherlands all hold national elections, while Italy is expected to call snap elections as well. Many fear populist, non-traditional, anti-EU parties on both the far right and left are on the rise and will grab national power. Though these parties are gaining in polls and winning local elections, they still lack the political infrastructure to meaningfully impact policy or make the market’s most-feared scenarios—like another country’s exit from the EU or even the eurozone—a reality. Thus, when the “worst-case” scenario doesn’t come to pass, the likely result is relief.

European politics are factionalized and scattered. In the US, the two-party system dominates, with minor third party movements cropping up occasionally. But in the parliamentary system—used often in Europe and elsewhere around the globe—there is room for more parties and more platforms. Lately, parties with minority support have popped up across Europe, forcing fragile coalitions and muddying the legislature’s ability to take decisive policy action. This feature alone screams more gridlock than widely imagined, reducing legislative risks for stocks.

Italy

Research Analysis

Ben Thistlethwaite
Reality Check

Infrastructure Isn’t Always Industrial Grade

By, 01/23/2017
Ratings1274.03937

In the wake of Donald Trump’s election, many attributed Industrials stocks’ rise to expectations for increased US infrastructure spending—one of Trump’s big campaign promises. However, that doesn’t make it wise to pile into infrastructure-related sectors solely based on Trump’s pledges. It’s still too soon to say exactly what the administration focuses on as the new president formally takes the reins, but expectations for an outsized infrastructure impact have likely outpaced reality.

Already moderating his promises a bit, Trump has lowered his infrastructure spending plan from the campaigned $1 trillion to $550 billion—roughly 3% of GDP. Now $550 billion worth of spending could be impactful if spent all at once (and presuming it didn’t crowd out private investment in the process). However, it’s likely spread out over many years—muting its stimulative power—and probably wouldn’t start until 2018, just in time for midterms. It’s also unrealistic to expect an infrastructure bill—or any bill— to pass through Congress undiluted or without bringing up other political landmines like raising taxes or deficit spending. In other words, there is a lot of potential for gridlock to get in the way.

Updating infrastructure has benefits, but the economy doesn’t need a massive infrastructure bill to keep growing—the private sector has done fine driving most of the growth this expansion. Past infrastructure spending bills haven’t moved the needle because they require years of planning, and spending typically gets bogged down across myriad national government agencies—not to mention conflicts with state and municipal needs. Consider the 2009 American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, which lacked readily available projects and drove little meaningful revenue for Industrials companies. And 2015’s five-year, fully funded (by the Fed’s dividends) $305 billion Highway Bill has thus far had a muted effect, going almost unnoticed.

Research Analysis

Fisher Investments Editorial Staff
Into Perspective

Market Insights Podcast: How to Read the Modern Financial News

By, 01/19/2017
Ratings363.458333

In this podcast, we talk to Content Group Manager Todd Bliman on how investors can navigate the modern financial news media.

Research Analysis

Fisher Investments Editorial Staff
Into Perspective

MarketMinder Podcast: November 2016 – Assessing Global Macro Drivers

By, 12/12/2016
Ratings74.357143

MarketMinder’s editorial staff sits down with Fisher Investments Capital Markets Analyst Brad Pyles. (Recorded 11/17/2016)

Subscribe

Get a weekly roundup of our market insights.Sign up for the MarketMinder email newsletter. Learn more.

What We're Reading

By , The New York Times, 05/22/2017

MarketMinder's View: For several weeks after President Trump was elected, pundits heralded a supposed “Trump trade” in which tax cuts, infrastructure spending and deregulation would send US stocks soaring. We explored some of this forecast’s shortcomings—namely, political rhetoric should never be the basis of an investment decision—and reality is showing that “Trump trade” was a falsehood. Per FactSet, from 11/8/2016 – 5/19/2017, the S&P 500 Total Return Index (gross dividends) has returned 12.6%, trailing the MSCI World ex. USA Index’s (net dividends) 14.8%. By no means are US stocks struggling, but foreign stocks are doing noticeably better than most folks projected. Now, we think the breakdown between “America First” and “International First” companies in this article is a mite simplistic since sector drivers (e.g., energy and retail struggles) matter and aren’t all directly related to politics. However, as this piece also shows, Trump has moderated significantly on various issues, from China to trade: proof investors shouldn’t change their portfolio based on the mere hope or fear that campaign promises will lead to action. Banking on US outperformance solely on White House hopes puts investors at risk of missing substantial opportunities elsewhere in the world.      

By , The Washington Post, 05/22/2017

MarketMinder's View: Here is your Monday helping of “News You Can Use!” With college graduates now entering the working world, one of the best financial decisions they can make is to start saving for retirement. It probably isn’t most recent college grads’ top priority—and it definitely isn’t the sexiest—but young people’s greatest asset is time. The earlier they start saving and investing, the more time compounding has to work its magic. So if there is someone near and dear to your heart graduating college this year, feel free to include this article along with your gift: It could pay dividends for them in the future! Alternatively, if your kids or grandkids are in high school, know that any individual with earned income can contribute to a retirement account (though limits apply, of course). If investing is great for 22 year olds because of time, it’s five years better for a 17 year-old.

By , USA Today, 05/22/2017

MarketMinder's View: We aren’t in the business of forecasting a presidential impeachment (not our forte) but attempting to derive the market fallout from one is a futile exercise, in our view. From a historical point of view, there haven’t been many impeachment-worthy political scandals in US history, so the dataset is small—not enough to draw a meaningful conclusion. Second, assuming a Mike Pence presidency would benefit markets because he’s a “normal” politician presumes Trump is innately bad for markets and that any politician being innately good for markets is a thing ever. Yet if that were the case, how are global stocks up nicely since Trump’s November election? Now, we aren’t arguing the mythical “Trump Rally” is real. Rather, in our view, stocks are up because they looked at what a Trump presidency actually meant: gridlock (of the intraparty variety). A gridlocked government has been just fine for markets during this bull market, and it should continue to be, despite all the noise otherwise. For more, see our 5/11/2017 commentary, “Into Perspective: Markets and Impeachment.”     

By , Econbrowser, 05/22/2017

MarketMinder's View: We often hear about the powers of “Big Data,” not just in economics, but in everyday life, too. Very smart people are working on ways to more accurately forecast future trends, whether it’s the economy, markets, the weather or even disease. It’s all very cool and interesting, but for investors, we recommend exercising caution any time you hear about a new-fangled economic or market forecasting tool. Don’t forget one of the top rules in investing: Past performance isn’t indicative of future returns. Gauges that draw exclusively on past data with no forward-looking inputs won’t be able to tell you much about the future—only what recent history looks like. Moreover, revisions can skew a historical dataset, and without context, you may be comparing apples to oranges. Data are wonderful, but they’re also limited and imperfect, so treat them accordingly. Moreover, data are a tool, not The Solution. It will take careful analysis of said data, as well as qualitative assessments of the theory you are exploring, to reach meaningful conclusions.

Global Market Update

Market Wrap-Up, Monday, May 22, 2017

Below is a market summary as of market close Monday, May 22, 2017:

  • Global Equities: MSCI World (+0.5%)
  • US Equities: S&P 500 (+0.5%)
  • UK Equities: MSCI UK (+0.3%)
  • Best Country: Austria (+1.9%)
  • Worst Country: Belgium (-0.8%)
  • Best Sector: Information Technology (+0.9%)
  • Worst Sector: Energy (+0.0%)

Bond Yields: 10-year US Treasury yields rose 0.02 percentage point to 2.26%.

 

Editors' Note: Tracking Stock and Bond Indexes

 

Source: FactSet. Unless otherwise specified, all country returns are based on the MSCI index in US dollars for the country or region and include net dividends. S&P 500 returns are presented including gross dividends. Sector returns are the MSCI World constituent sectors in USD including net dividends.