Data &
Technology
Research
Reports
Report Solutions
Reports Library
Actionable
Strategies
Free
Resources
Simple Backtest Calculator
Simple Seasonality Calculator
The Kelly Criterion Calculator
Sentiment Geo Map
Public Research Reports
Free Webinar
Pricing
Company
About
Meet Our Team
In the News
Testimonials
Client Success Stories
Contact
Log inLoginSign up
< BACK TO ALL REPORTS

Modest internal Nasdaq selling triggers leveraged bets

Jason Goepfert
2020-09-14
The Nasdaq Composite has seen over a week of declines, but none of the days have seen intense, overwhelming selling pressure. This is one of the "best" declines in terms of breadth. The lack of internal selling has emboldened ETF traders, who have moved into 3x leveraged funds like TQQQ.

The driving force of much of the rally over the past few months has been big tech stocks, driving the Nasdaq higher. We've seen that momentum there is wobbling, and yet traders continue to place record bets that it's going to continue higher.

One of the knocks against the idea that the Nasdaq has suffered damage is that there hasn't been any "real" selling pressure despite the drop over the past week. On the Nasdaq exchange, the 10-day Up Volume Ratio is below 50%, but there hasn't been any single day with heavily lopsided selling.

Because there haven't been any days with overwhelming selling, perhaps that calls into question that sentiment has truly soured. If we were seeing a regime change, then it makes sense to believe that we should see some days with a total get-me-out mentality. That hasn't happened.

Let's go back and look at every time the Nasdaq hit a 52-week high, then saw at least 6 days of selling with at least a 5% pullback. We'll separate out the instances between those with the best breadth and the worst, to see if it made any difference for forward returns.

During the selloffs that held up best internally, the Up Volume Ratio averaged 44% during the 6-day selling sprees, with no day dropping below 21% on average. Forward returns were quite good, especially over the next 2-3 months. There were 2 big losses, 1998 and 2000, but most of them triggered during the last gasps of the bubble, and momentum carried the Nasdaq higher (for a while).

For the broader market, represented by the S&P 500, returns were worse over the shorter-term, with the index showing a positive return a month later only 36% of the time. It mostly recovered over the medium-term.

Contrast this to the 6-day selloffs with the worst selling pressure after the initial peak.

These showed worse performance shorter-term, but better relative returns over the next 3 months. Surprisingly, there wasn't a huge difference between them. Probably the most interesting data point is that the worst-breadth signals were spread out across the entire study period; the best-breadth ones were clustered in the year or two leading up to the peak of the bubble.

We saw earlier that despite catastrophic losses in some of the options on big tech stocks, traders are still diving in. Sarah Ponczek of Bloomberg notes that we can see this behavior in ETF flows as well. Go-to funds like QQQ are seeing outflows, while triple-leveraged long funds like TQQQ are seeing inflows.

The 5-day difference in flows between the two funds has never been greater.

Whether this actually means anything is questionable. Forward returns after other big relative inflows to TQQQ were mixed, with some short-term weakness but longer-term strength due to the study period being dominated by a bull market.

There was also no evidence that these infusions into leveraged funds preceded a drop in the big tech stocks dropping relative to the average tech stock.

During the brief selloff from the highs, we've seen modest evidence that something has changed, and the Nasdaq is likely to see further selling pressure. Pricks of a momentum bubble like the past week have had a slightly better record at preceding declines than sustained rebounds.

The fact that there has been no day with really intense selling appears to be a point in bulls' favor, and it's not canceled out by the rush into leveraged funds. The biggest knock against a sustained run to new highs remains the simple fact that so many options traders are betting on that very outcome, and markets rarely accommodate that kind of behavior for long.

Sorry, you don't have access to this report

Upgrade your subscription plan to get access
Go to Dasboard
DATA &
TECHnologies
IndicatorEdge
‍
BackTestEdge
‍
Other Tools
‍
DataEdge API
RESEARCH
reports
Research Solution
‍
Reports Library
‍
actionable
Strategies
Trading Strategies
‍
Smart Stock Scanner
‍
FREE
RESOUrCES
Simple Backtest
Calculator
Simple Seasonality
Calculator
The Kelly Criterion
Calculator
Sentiment Geo Map
‍
Public Research Reports
‍
Free Webinar
COMPANY
‍
About
‍
Meet our Team
‍
In the News
‍
Testimonials
‍
Client Success Stories
Pricing
Bundle pricing
‍
Announcements
‍
FAQ
© 2024 Sundial Capital Research Inc. All rights reserved.
Setsail Marketing
TermsPrivacyAffiliate Program
Risk Disclosure: Futures and forex trading contains substantial risk and is not for every investor. An investor could potentially lose all or more than the initial investment. Risk capital is money that can be lost without jeopardizing ones’ financial security or life style. Only risk capital should be used for trading and only those with sufficient risk capital should consider trading. Past performance is not necessarily indicative of future results.

Hypothetical Performance Disclosure: Hypothetical performance results have many inherent limitations, some of which are described below. No representation is being made that any account will or is likely to achieve profits or losses similar to those shown; in fact, there are frequently sharp differences between hypothetical performance results and the actual results subsequently achieved by any particular trading program. One of the limitations of hypothetical performance results is that they are generally prepared with the benefit of hindsight. In addition, hypothetical trading does not involve financial risk, and no hypothetical trading record can completely account for the impact of financial risk of actual trading. for example, the ability to withstand losses or to adhere to a particular trading program in spite of trading losses are material points which can also adversely affect actual trading results. There are numerous other factors related to the markets in general or to the implementation of any specific trading program which cannot be fully accounted for in the preparation of hypothetical performance results and all which can adversely affect trading results.

Testimonial Disclosure: Testimonials appearing on this website may not be representative of other clients or customers and is not a guarantee of future performance or success.