The Federal Reserve decided to drop their target Fed Funds rate to an all-time record of 0.00% to 0.25%.

This chart, from Bill Luby's Vix and More,  highlights the daily effective federal funds rate, which is a volume-weighted average of rates on trades arranged by major brokers.  It puts things in perspective, doesn't it?

Not surprisingly, last Friday’s effective Fed Funds rate of 0.11% is a record low.  In contrast, the record high of 22.36% dates back to July 22, 1981. The average Fed Funds rate since 1954 is 5.62%.

People Are Less Scared.

Something else going down is the VIX, which is now down more than 50% from its highs.  The VIX looks out 30 days into the future and captures “event volatility” associated with events that are expected to occur in the next 30 days. These include Fed meetings, important economic data releases (employment report, consumer prices, retail sales, durable goods orders, GDP, etc.), earnings from bellwether stocks, even hurricanes, geopolitical crises and other events which can expect to cast a shadow over the course of the next 30 days.

As shown above, the VIX recently broke below its November lows and is currently resting just above 40.

The VIX typically goes up when the market goes down, but even on days when the market has declined this week, the VIX has gone down as well.  That means investors are feeling a lot less fear.

What about the Government, though?  If they are so confident, why continue to print money?

What's a Few Trillion Among Friends?

Since the economic-stimulus package in February, the government has offered more than a dozen multibillion-dollar rescue packages for a variety of industries endangered by the financial chaos and the recession. The magnitude of even one of these mega-bailouts is hard enough to grasp. The following Slate visualization attempts to put the magnitude of these rescue packages in perspective.

Here are a few other items that caught my eye this week.

• Is it a Bail-Out or Smart Economics? (Dash of Insight)
• Sy Harding Argues that Government Responses Will Limit Recession. (Financial Sense)
• Money flow up sharply as S&P holds 50-day Moving Average. (Fallond)
• Biggest 6-Day Decline Ever for the Dollar. (Bespoke)

The Federal Reserve decided to drop their target Fed Funds rate to an all-time record of 0.00% to 0.25%.

This chart, from Bill Luby's Vix and More,  highlights the daily effective federal funds rate, which is a volume-weighted average of rates on trades arranged by major brokers.  It puts things in perspective, doesn't it?

Not surprisingly, last Friday’s effective Fed Funds rate of 0.11% is a record low.  In contrast, the record high of 22.36% dates back to July 22, 1981. The average Fed Funds rate since 1954 is 5.62%.

People Are Less Scared.

Something else going down is the VIX, which is now down more than 50% from its highs.  The VIX looks out 30 days into the future and captures “event volatility” associated with events that are expected to occur in the next 30 days. These include Fed meetings, important economic data releases (employment report, consumer prices, retail sales, durable goods orders, GDP, etc.), earnings from bellwether stocks, even hurricanes, geopolitical crises and other events which can expect to cast a shadow over the course of the next 30 days.

As shown above, the VIX recently broke below its November lows and is currently resting just above 40.

The VIX typically goes up when the market goes down, but even on days when the market has declined this week, the VIX has gone down as well.  That means investors are feeling a lot less fear.

What about the Government, though?  If they are so confident, why continue to print money?

What's a Few Trillion Among Friends?

Since the economic-stimulus package in February, the government has offered more than a dozen multibillion-dollar rescue packages for a variety of industries endangered by the financial chaos and the recession. The magnitude of even one of these mega-bailouts is hard enough to grasp. The following Slate visualization attempts to put the magnitude of these rescue packages in perspective.

Here are a few other items that caught my eye this week.

• Is it a Bail-Out or Smart Economics? (Dash of Insight)
• Sy Harding Argues that Government Responses Will Limit Recession. (Financial Sense)
• Money flow up sharply as S&P holds 50-day Moving Average. (Fallond)
• Biggest 6-Day Decline Ever for the Dollar. (Bespoke)

Last Monday the news of the day seemed to be that the U.S. markets rallied because Obama committed to spend money on infrastructure.  I saw the same story on Bloomberg, CNBC, CNN, and pretty much everywhere I looked.  On the other hand, a quick check of the indices told me that most markets around the globe also were up between 4 and 10% that day.  Does that mean that Russia, Italy, and the Asian markets all rallied because Obama said that he was going to spend money on the U.S., or is it possible that some other catalyst caused markets to raise?

The point is that the news gives many a false sense of certainty.  There is an old trading adage: It isn't the news that matters … What matters is the reaction to the news.  And recently I sense that people are getting tired of the choppiness and are starting to buy again, even on bad news.

Bad News?  How about headline-making scandals?   First, the Governor of Illinois tried to sell his influence, and even the Senate seat vacated by President-Elect Obama. Second, Bernie Madoff, a former Chairman of NASDAQ, was arrested and charged with fraud in a $50 billion 'Ponzi-scheme' swindle of investors.  Third, we had the whole auto industry bail-out question.

Still, markets went up, and somehow fear is subsiding.  Will we see a Santa Claus Rally?  From my perspective, a downside correction and successful re-test would be more constructive here.  So would better volume and less volatility.  But beggars can't be choosers; and we've had a 20% rally off the lows.

Nature or Nurture: 

After watching the Government bail-out financial companies, the auto industry seems to have learned a trick, or two. To me, this video represents a very real part of our economic ecosystem.  The swan has been conditioned to pull the rope to request a handout.  When nothing happens, the swan keeps ringing the bell … and is ultimately rewarded.  Question: is the swan trained, or did the swans train their handlers?

The direct link to the video is here. 

Also, here are a few other posts that caught my eye this week:

• Henry Blodget on Why Wall Street Always Blows It (The Atlantic).
• Are You Buying Now That Blood Is In the Streets?  Some Scary Predictions (Fortune).
• Human Interest Twist to the Recent Financial Crisis in "Profiles in Panic" (Vanity Fair).

Last Monday the news of the day seemed to be that the U.S. markets rallied because Obama committed to spend money on infrastructure.  I saw the same story on Bloomberg, CNBC, CNN, and pretty much everywhere I looked.  On the other hand, a quick check of the indices told me that most markets around the globe also were up between 4 and 10% that day.  Does that mean that Russia, Italy, and the Asian markets all rallied because Obama said that he was going to spend money on the U.S., or is it possible that some other catalyst caused markets to raise?

The point is that the news gives many a false sense of certainty.  There is an old trading adage: It isn't the news that matters … What matters is the reaction to the news.  And recently I sense that people are getting tired of the choppiness and are starting to buy again, even on bad news.

Bad News?  How about headline-making scandals?   First, the Governor of Illinois tried to sell his influence, and even the Senate seat vacated by President-Elect Obama. Second, Bernie Madoff, a former Chairman of NASDAQ, was arrested and charged with fraud in a $50 billion 'Ponzi-scheme' swindle of investors.  Third, we had the whole auto industry bail-out question.

Still, markets went up, and somehow fear is subsiding.  Will we see a Santa Claus Rally?  From my perspective, a downside correction and successful re-test would be more constructive here.  So would better volume and less volatility.  But beggars can't be choosers; and we've had a 20% rally off the lows.

Nature or Nurture: 

After watching the Government bail-out financial companies, the auto industry seems to have learned a trick, or two. To me, this video represents a very real part of our economic ecosystem.  The swan has been conditioned to pull the rope to request a handout.  When nothing happens, the swan keeps ringing the bell … and is ultimately rewarded.  Question: is the swan trained, or did the swans train their handlers?

The direct link to the video is here. 

Also, here are a few other posts that caught my eye this week:

• Henry Blodget on Why Wall Street Always Blows It (The Atlantic).
• Are You Buying Now That Blood Is In the Streets?  Some Scary Predictions (Fortune).
• Human Interest Twist to the Recent Financial Crisis in "Profiles in Panic" (Vanity Fair).

There was good and bad news in the market this week. The bad news was that the economy continued to suffer (for example, the worst job loss numbers in decades), and the good news was that the market went up anyway. In contrast to recent reactions, that's very good news. 

Something about the tempo of the market may have changed this week too. There were still a few big fast moves, however there were also longer periods of more natural trading.

I'm not saying that the bear market is over. It will probably take a lot more than this to have a meaningful long-term bottom. Nonetheless, we may have a nice intermediate term support area in place, and the possibility for a decent rally from here.

The Migration to Automated Trading:

For many years I was a discretionary trader.  That means I decided what
to buy and what to sell using the tools I thought gave me the best edge
for that trade.  Over time I relied more on technical analysis.  And,
now, my trading is done by automated systems. 

The use of so many
different algorithms provides an interesting perspective on the rhythm
of market.

For years, market charts reflected the collective fear and greed of market participants.  Likewise, the patterns from one generation are not much different than the patterns from a different generation of traders; not because the world hadn't changed, but because human nature hadn't changed.

People still traded with people.  When prices got too high, a certain percentage of people decided to sell.  When prices started to go down, some people got fearful – and as prices continued to go down, other people got greedy and decide to buy.  In other words, human nature is human nature; and while the magnitude of the moves may change a little, the basic pattern, the shapes and the slopes probably have remained relatively consistent for millennia.

The Markets Are Changing:

Now, however, something different is beginning to happen.  A greater percentage of the daily trading volume results from computer trading and automated models.  Consequently, more trades are happening outside the influence of fear and greed.  This means that the shapes and the basic nature of trading patterns are bound to change.

It is early in this cycle.  Think about the Internet in the early 1990s.  Looking back, it all makes sense.  Yet in 1995, did you imagine this (how radically research, media, information delivery, media, and commerce would change)?  The game is changing.  Investing will never be the same again.

There was good and bad news in the market this week. The bad news was that the economy continued to suffer (for example, the worst job loss numbers in decades), and the good news was that the market went up anyway. In contrast to recent reactions, that's very good news. 

Something about the tempo of the market may have changed this week too. There were still a few big fast moves, however there were also longer periods of more natural trading.

I'm not saying that the bear market is over. It will probably take a lot more than this to have a meaningful long-term bottom. Nonetheless, we may have a nice intermediate term support area in place, and the possibility for a decent rally from here.

The Migration to Automated Trading:

For many years I was a discretionary trader.  That means I decided what
to buy and what to sell using the tools I thought gave me the best edge
for that trade.  Over time I relied more on technical analysis.  And,
now, my trading is done by automated systems. 

The use of so many
different algorithms provides an interesting perspective on the rhythm
of market.

For years, market charts reflected the collective fear and greed of market participants.  Likewise, the patterns from one generation are not much different than the patterns from a different generation of traders; not because the world hadn't changed, but because human nature hadn't changed.

People still traded with people.  When prices got too high, a certain percentage of people decided to sell.  When prices started to go down, some people got fearful – and as prices continued to go down, other people got greedy and decide to buy.  In other words, human nature is human nature; and while the magnitude of the moves may change a little, the basic pattern, the shapes and the slopes probably have remained relatively consistent for millennia.

The Markets Are Changing:

Now, however, something different is beginning to happen.  A greater percentage of the daily trading volume results from computer trading and automated models.  Consequently, more trades are happening outside the influence of fear and greed.  This means that the shapes and the basic nature of trading patterns are bound to change.

It is early in this cycle.  Think about the Internet in the early 1990s.  Looking back, it all makes sense.  Yet in 1995, did you imagine this (how radically research, media, information delivery, media, and commerce would change)?  The game is changing.  Investing will never be the same again.