"January Effect" an omen for 2015? --Investment & Finance Thread - Jan. 4

A good January for stocks promises big gains for the year --or so goes the story goes (from Down January for stocks is bad omen for 2014 - USA Today) "How stocks fare in January often sets the tone for the full year".   A lot of work's been done on this, and TradingSim reports that  

When the S&P500 has a net positive gain in the first five trading days of the year, there is about an 86% chance that the stock market will rise for the year, it has worked in 31 out of the last 36 years (as of 2006). The five exceptions to this rule were in 1966, 1973, 1990, 1994, and 2002. Four out of these five years were war related, while 1994 was a flat market. As history suggests, the markets average nearly 14% gains when the January Effect is triggered.

--but the downside is:

A down January is a bad omen for the stock market. Yale Hirsch of the The Stock Traders Almanac suggests that since 1950, every down January in the S&P500 preceded a new or extended bear market, or in some cases, a flat market. They go on to further suggest that down January’s are followed by substantial declines averaging -13%.

           
    % above avg. months % times the following year is above avg. % times month predicts following year  
           
  January 55% 66% 59%  
  February 48% 66% 55%  
  March 60% 66% 56%  
  April 53% 62% 55%  
  May 47% 63% 60%  
  June 44% 62% 53%  
  July 57% 63% 55%  
  August 59% 62% 55%  
  September 38% 62% 49%  
  October 51% 66% 51%  
  November 56% 62% 57%  
  December 67% 64% 58%  
           
  average 53% 64% 55%  
           

 

That's nice, but let's do our own thinking. 

On the left is what we get when we look at the Dow Jones average monthly change for each month since 1896 and compare the month's performance with the total returns for the subsequent 12 months.   The idea is to see if January is any better at predicting the up comming year any better than say February or March or...

What we end up with is the fact that most months are up, most years are up so most months predict the following year.   Since 1896 January has in fact predicted better than most, but our winner turns out to be May which is right 60% of the time vs. January's 59% score.

 

*  *  *  *  *  *  * 

 

My personal take is that this is random and the problem we face is that it's sooo easy to see trends in purely random numbers.  Check out the plot on the right of how an imaginary econ impact can affect my imaginary market.  We end up with a trend line that slopes slightly downward.  We could even exaggerate the scale and use it to "prove" a correlation. 

My point is that all the numbers plotted there are random, and random numbers can always slow some kind of trend line.  What's not random though is that people are productive and over the years they create wealth and if we invest in them we get rich.  I can live with that.

 

This is the thread where folks swap ideas on savings and investment --here's a list of popular investing links that freepers have posted here and tomorrow morning we'll go on with our--

Open invitation continues always for idea-input for the thread, this being a joint effort works well.   Keywords: financial, WallStreet, stockmarket, economy.