“Okay, Gary,” you concur. Stocks are super expensive today, much like they were in 1999. Yet are the stock market internals (breadth) genuinely as weak as they were back in 1999? No, they are not. That said, stock market breadth is noticeably shaky and growing shakier by the moment.
Take a look at the ability of today’s NASDAQ to keep powering forward in price, albeit at a slightly slower pace, even as declining issues have started to overwhelm advancing issues. The similarity to the late 1990s is discernible.
The take home? Employ a tactical asset allocation strategy and stick with it. By adjusting your portfolio’s mix when more caution is warranted, you will improve your risk-adjusted returns over time.
For instance, when sky-high valuations couple with weak market internals, a 65% growth/35% income investor might downshift to 50% large-cap equity/30% investment-grade income/20% cash. Another person might be more risk averse, and decide that 40% large-cap equity/25% investment-grade income/35% cash places him/her in a better position to weather a future storm.
Naturally, there is a flip side here. When low-to-fairly valued prices couple with improving market internals, a tactical asset allocation strategy would call for more risk. It would be time for the moderate investor described above to rebalance back to his preferred level of 65% growth/35% income. Moreover, the growth would likely include smaller-caps as well as higher-yielding income on the other side of the ledger.
I recognize that not everyone wishes to engage a tactical asset allocation strategy. Fair enough. Still, those who paid attention when I addressed valuation and breadth concerns to a national audience in 1999 did not meet with disaster in 2000-2002; those who read my articles and recession warnings in 2008 did not experience the level of devastation that many experienced in the 2008-2009 financial collapse.
Similarly, to the extent that you may experience apprehension about setting your portfolio on cruise control – to the extent that you wonder about the sense of holding onto the most aggressive securities in your accounts forever and ever – consider your alternatives. Perhaps hold onto assets like the iShares S&P 100 ETF (NYSEARCA:OEF), Health Care Select Sect SPDR ETF (NYSEARCA:XLV) and iShares USA Minimum Volatility (USMV); perhaps let funds like iShares Russell 2000 (IWM) go until the time that we have more attractive valuations and improving market internals (breadth).